Pub Right of Passage-1

CONSERVATION REFERENCE SERIES #3 [2nd Edition]
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
ELEPHANT CORRIDORS OF INDIA
Edited by Vivek Menon, Sandeep Kr Tiwari, K Ramkumar,
Sunil Kyarong, Upasana Ganguly and Raman Sukumar
In loving memory of
Ashok Kumar
Founder and Chairman Emeritus, Wildlife Trust of India
The legendary conservationist whose legacy lives on
In Service of Nature
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
The securement of elephant corridors is being supported by the Asian Elephant Alliance
Edited by
Vivek Menon, Sandeep Kr Tiwari, K Ramkumar, Sunil Kyarong,
Upasana Ganguly and Raman Sukumar
Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) is a non-profit conservation organisation committed Photo credits
to initate and catalyse actions that prevent the destruction of India’s wildlife and its
habitat. In the long run, it aims to achieve, through proactive reforms in policy and Front cover: Aniruddha Mookerjee
management, an atmosphere conductive to conservation. WTI works through building Back cover: Rathin Barman
partnerships and alliances and its strengths lie in its willingness to work with innovative Title page: Rudra Prasanna Mahapatra
conservation techniques like acquiring land for wildlife and rescue and rehabilitation.
Adrish Poddar: Pages 343, 351, 371, 379, 392, 393, 400, 401, 409, 416, 417 and 441
Suggested citation: <Author names> 2017. <Paper title> In: Right of Passage: Balsreng Sangma: Page 561
Elephant Corridors of India [2nd Edition]. Menon, V, Tiwari, S K, Ramkumar, K, Deepankar Barman: Pages 453, 459, 471, 476 and 483
Kyarong, S, Ganguly, U and Sukumar, R (Eds.). Conservation Reference Series No. 3. Dilip Deori: Pages 59, 501 and 525
WIldlife Trust of India, New Delhi. Jasoprakas Debdas: Pages 314 and 327
K Ramkumar: Pages 447, 603, 609, 615, 628, 629, 665, 703, 725, 731, 737 and 743
Keywords: Elephant corridors, corridor securing, habitat securement, habitat
Kalaimani A: Pages 671, 697, 749, 755 and 761
fragmentation, Asian Elephant, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, West
Kamlesh Pandey: Pages 5, 193, 229 and 774
Bengal, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala.
Ramith M: Pages 585, 677 and 717
The designations of geographical entities in this publication and the presentation of Rathin Barman: Page 531
the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Rudra Prasanna Mahapatra: Pages 140 and 141
authors or WTI concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or of its Samson A: Pages 647 and 659
authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Sandeep Kr Tiwari: Pages 6, 42, 103, 157, 163, 217, 424, 431, 434, 549, 555, 567, 573,
574 and 641
Copyright © WTI 2017 Subrat Kr Behera: Pages 169, 175, 199, 205, 211, 217, 223, 249, 263, 271, 283, 291, 299,
306 and 307
Project team
Sumanta Kundu: Pages 13, 21, 63, 64, 73, 79, 85, 127 and 133
Adrish Poddar, Amrendra Kr Singh, Arpit Deomurari, Arumugam R, B Ramakrishnan,
T Muruganandam: Page 762
Balsreng Sangma, Ben Teron, Bhaskar Choudhury, Borsali Teron, Deepankar Barman,
Vipul Mauriya: Page 109
Dilip Deori, Dinesh Pandey, Gahar Abedin, Jose Louies, Kalaimani A, Keshab Gautam,
Manivel, Mithun Biswas, Rahul Singh, Rajendra Mishra, Ramith M, Ramkumar K, Rathin
Barman, Rathnakumar S, Rudra Prasanna Mahapatra, Sabu Jahas, Samson A, Sandeep
Chouksey, Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Shajan M A, Subrat Kumar Behera, Sumanta Kundu,
Sunil Kyarong, Surendra Varma, Upasana Ganguly, Ved Prakash, Vipul Mauriya and
Vivek Menon.
Editorial Team: Rupa Gandhi Chaudhary, Pranav Capila and Upasana Ganguly
Cartography: K Ramkumar
Layout: Anjali Pathak
Cover Design: Pranav Capila
Printed at Lipee Scan

CONSERVATION REFERENCE SERIES #3 RIGHT OF PASSAGE
CONTENTS
Foreword viii Chapter 7: Elephant Corridors of North-Eastern India 424

Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Sunil Kyarong, Anwaruddin Choudhury,
Message x
A Christy Williams, K Ramkumar and Dilip Deori
Preface xii
Acknowledgements xiv Chapter 8: Elephant Corridors of Southern India 574

K Ramkumar, Surendra Varma, P S Easa, Arun Venkataraman,
B Ramakrishnan, Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Vivek Menon and R Sukumar
Executive Summary 1
Chapter 9: Elephant Corridors of India: An Analysis 762
Chapter 1: Asian Elephants in India: A Review 6 Vivek Menon and Sandeep Kr Tiwari
P S Easa
Appendix I:
Chapter 2: What is an Asian Elephant Corridor 24
Ecological Prioritisation of Identified Corridors 780
Arun Venkataraman, Sandeep Kr Tiwari and K Ramkumar
Appendix II:
Chapter 3: Documenting and Securing Corridors: Conservation Feasibility of Identified Corridors 790
The Approach and Process 42
Sandeep Kr Tiwari Bibliography 800
Contributors 816
Chapter 4: Elephant Corridors of North-Western India 64
Sandeep Kr Tiwari, A K Singh, A J T Johnsingh, A Christy Williams, Acronyms 824
K Ramkumar and Sumanta Kundu
Chapter 5: Elephant Corridors of Central India 140

Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Subrat Kr Behera, K Ramkumar,
Chanchal Kr Sar, D Swain and R Sukumar
Chapter 6: Elephant Corridors of Northern West Bengal 314 Legends for 3D, Plot and Location maps used in this book 50-51
Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Adrish Poddar and K Ramkumar
vi vii
meantime, a survey was initiated by Wildlife Trust India in collaboration with

Project Elephant to review the status of the existing corridors and new ones
that may have emerged in the last one decade and prepare conservation
plan for securing those.
FOREWORD The second edition of the publication is an outcome of concerted efforts

by the Wildlife Trust of India and a number of elephant experts and
conservationists who have come forward to resolve the critical issues of
habitat fragmentation and loss. The corridors have been discussed in State
THE CONSERVATION OF GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY IS TODAY Consultative meetings involving officials from State Forest Departments,
THREATENED mainly due to loss, destruction and fragmentation of elephant experts, conservation organisations and researchers before
natural ecosystem to cater to the need of growing economy and increasing finalising.
human population. Larger mammals like elephants that require extensive
habitats for survival are one of the most affected ones due to the land use The authors have put forward a conservation plan for each corridor and
change. The spread of human settlements, commercial plantations, industry, have also prioritised the corridors based on ecological importance and
farming, mining, linear infrastructures etc are restricting movements of conservation feasibility. This will definitely be of immense help to wildlife
these long ranging animals. This has been enhancing human-elephant managers.
conflict in many parts of the country. Thus, the harmonious relationship
between elephants and people is gradually getting strained resulting in The publication is truly a commendable effort towards providing a
causalities on both the ends in extreme conditions. roadmap for securing of elephant corridors in India. It could be used by
various agencies, including the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Maintenance of wildlife corridors is an essential element of managing Change (Government of India) and State Forest Departments, conservation
landscape and an important tool to overcome the adverse effects of habitat organisations, researchers, developmental agencies, donors as well as
fragmentation and loss for ensuring larger habitat availability, genetic policy makers to help protect and secure the corridors for the long-term
exchange within and between the populations and minimising human- conservation of our National Heritage Animal.
elephant conflict. The Wildlife Trust of India and Asian Nature Conservation
Foundation in collaboration with State Forest Departments, Project Elephant New Delhi
and researchers had identified 88 elephant corridors and published a August 10, 2017
report, ‘Right of Passage: Elephant Corridors of India’ in 2005. (Siddhanta Das)
Over the years, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
(Government of India) State Forest Departments and conservation
organisations have been working for securing these corridors. In the
viii ix
conservation organisations have been working in tandem to secure and

protect elephant corridors.
I am sure the 2nd Edition of this publication will provide a good reference
to wildlife managers for protecting and securing the corridors. This
publication will also be of great assistance to developmental agencies in
Message proper planning and creation of linear infrastructures in order to avoid
or minimise the negative impacts on elephant habitat and natural areas,
as well as to the policy makers in framing an ecologically sound policy for
the conservation of our National Heritage Animal.
INDIAN ELEPHANTS REPRESENT THE INDIAN ETHOS and are
closely associated with the people of India in their religious, cultural, literary
and traditional heritage. However, throughout its range of distribution
in country, the conservation of the endangered Asian elephant (Elephas New Delhi
maximus) is threatened, due to the loss and fragmentation of habitats August 5, 2017 (R K Srivastava)
– owing to rising elephant populations, pressures from fast-increasing
human populations, their changing lifestyles and consequential
agricultural and developmental activities – and poaching for ivory. India
hosts about 27,312 elephants (Elephant Census, 2017), a majority of them
spread across 29 Elephant Reserves, covering 11 Elephant Landscapes in
14 states. However, the fragmentation and shrinkage of elephant habitat
has increased human-elephant conflict in many parts of the country. To
prevent this situation from escalating, it is important that the corridors
that elephants have traditionally used are saved, before it is too late.
Wildlife Trust of India and Asian Nature Conservation Foundation, in

collaboration with state forest departments, Project Elephant Division of
the Ministry, had identified 88 elephant corridors and published a report
titled ‘Right of Passage: Elephant Corridors of India’ in 2005. This was a
significant contribution to elephant conservation and habitat protection
in India. The Elephant Task Force formed by Project Elephant, Ministry of
Environment, Forest and Climate Change in 2010 also recognised these
corridors. Over the years, the Ministry, state forest departments and
x xi
development goals. Such goals should however be in consonance with

overall sustainable development goals, which include nature conservation
as an important construct of social and environmental preservation. I am
sure managers of elephant habitats and infrastructure projects will both
benefit from this publication and that policy dialogue as well as direct action
will ensure that elephants get the right of way in our crowded nation. This is
PREFACE also the long-term solution to conflict, although in shorter time scales this
may not be visible.
I congratulate the team that undertook this gargantuan (or should I say
TWELVE YEARS IS MORE THAN HALF A HUMAN OR AN
elephantine) task within the Wildlife Trust of India, as well as the many
ELEPHANT GENERATION, and in a country such as India there are
individual elephant experts who are listed as authors and contributors,
inevitable changes that happen on the ground in this time span. New roads
and the state and union government officials who have helped to make
come up, new and faster trains are scheduled on old rail tracks requiring
this publication so much more error free. Side by side of such publications,
realignment of these routes, and human incursions into nature continue
which are status documents, conservation action continues apace to secure
at a daily rate. The first edition of Right of Passage, detailing 88 corridors for
on ground these pathways for the elephant, a cultural and heritage icon for
elephants in India, has gone out of date. I am therefore exceedingly happy
India and the world.
that the second edition of this publication has now come out.
In this edition you will notice that the number of corridors has gone up to
101, which is not good news at all. More corridors are formed only when
New Delhi
more fragmentation of habitat has occurred. Given that a few corridors (Vivek Menon)
August 5, 2017
that were listed earlier have now been put in the ‘impaired’ category (since Executive Director & CEO
elephant movement through them has ceased altogether because of
anthropogenic issues), this increase assumes greater significance.
As in the first edition, there are maps detailing the boundaries and topography
of the corridors, also showing human constructions in corridor areas. What
is more important, though, is the small section titled ‘Conservation Plan’ at
the end of each narration.
Nature and infrastructure need not always be at loggerheads. There

are enough technological solutions that can be put in place to ensure Wildlife Trust of India
safe passage to our National Heritage Animal while not compromising F-13, Sector 8, NOIDA - 201301, National Capital Region (NCR) - U.P., India
Tel: +91 120 4143900 Fax: +91 120 4143933, E-mail: info@wti.org.in, Website: www.wti.org.in
xii xiii
Itanagar Wildlife Sanctuary and Mr T Meize, DFO, D’Ering Wildlife Sanctuary

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS for facilitating the field team during the survey and sharing information on
elephant habitats and corridors in Arunachal Pradesh. We are also grateful
to Mr G N Sinha, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF), WL & CWLW,
Arunachal Pradesh; Mr R K Singh, CCF, Western Circle, Banderdewa; Mr P
Ringu, DCF (WL, HQ); Ms K Rinya, DCF, BR; Dr B B Bhatt, Research Officer,
WE EXPRESS OUR SINCERE THANKS AND GRATITUDE to all Wildlife Department; Mr Takum Nabam, Chairman, Ghora Abhe Society,
those who have contributed to this project through their ideas, information, Seijosa; Dr Anupam Sarmah and Mr David Smith, WWF-India; our former
guidance and photographs. Our sincere thanks to the Chief Wildlife Wardens colleague Dr Jahan Ahmed; and consultant Mr Deepankar Barman for
(CWLWs) of all elephant ranging states for granting the Wildlife Trust of India actively participating in the consultative meeting to review the draft report
team permission to undertake this work, and for all assistance extended on elephant corridors of Arunachal Pradesh.
during the process of groundtruthing corridors as well as the consultative
meetings held to review the draft report. We would like to acknowledge our We are grateful to Mr P R Marak, CF, East & West Garo Hills Wildlife Division;
sincere gratitude to Mr A M Singh, former Inspector General of Forest and Mr S N Sangma, Director, Balpakram National Park; Ms N R D Marak, DFO,
Director Project Elephant, and Mr R K Srivastava, Inspector General of Forest Wildlife Division, Garo Hills; Mr Jamesh Pohsngap, former DFO, Jaintia Hills
and Director Project Elephant, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Wildlife Division; and Ms H Lato, DFO, Jaintia Hills Wildlife Division and other
Change, Government of India, for their advice and support in undertaking field staff of the Meghalaya Forest Department for helping the team during
this work, and for organising the state consultative meetings to review the the groundtruthing of corridors in Meghalaya. We are also thankful to Mr
draft corridor reports. Rangku Sangma and other staff of the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council
(GHADC) for extending all help during the groundtruthing of corridors. We
We are thankful to Dr D V S Khati, CWLW, Uttarakhand for his assistance to the also extend our sincere thanks to Mr C Budnah, PCCF and Head of Forest
team. We express our sincere thanks to Mr S P Subudhi and Ms Neena Grewal, Force (HoFF), Meghalaya; Mr Y S Shullai, Additional PCCF (WL) and CWLW;
Director Rajaji National Park; Mr P S Srivastava and Ms Kahkasha Naseem, Dr Subhash Ashutosh, Additional PCCF-R&T; Mr P H S Bonney, Chief
Divisional Forest Officer (DFO), Ramnagar Forest Division; Mr Nishant Verma, Conservator of Forests (CCF), Wildlife; Mr S N Sangma, Director, Balpakram
DFO, Terai Central; Mr S P Singh, DFO, Terai Central; Mr P M Dhakate, DFO, National Park; Mr W S Manner, DFO, Khasi Hills Wildlife Division, Shillong; Mr
Terai East; Mr Saket Badola, Deputy Director, Corbett Tiger Reserve; Dr Koko B Lyngdoh, ACF, Khasi Hills Wildlife Division; Mr L S J Wahlay, Forest Ranger,
Rose, DFO, Kalagarh (Uttarakhand); Mr Shailesh Prasad, Director Dudhwa Jaintia Hills Wildlife Division; Ms H Lato, DFO, Jaintia Hills Wildlife Division;
Tiger Reserve and Mr Ganesh Bhatt, Deputy Director Dudhwa Tiger Reserve Mr H G Momin, ACF, East & West Garo Hills Division, and Ms N R D Marak,
(Uttar Pradesh); and other field staff of the Uttarakhand Forest Department DFO, Wildlife Division, Garo Hills for actively participating in the consultative
and Uttar Pradesh Forest Department for their advice and uncomplaining meeting to review the draft report on elephant corridors of Meghalaya.
assistance during the groundtruthing of corridors.
We are thankful to Mr Joysing Bey (DFO), Mr Pradip Terang (ACF), Mr Bibison
We express our sincere gratitude to Mr Tana Tappi, DFO Pakke Tiger Tokbi (Ranger), Karbi Anglong East Division; Mr P Sivakumar (DFO) and Mr
Reserve; Mr Neelam Nido, DFO, Bhalukphong Forest Division; Mr Joram, DFO, Pradip Das (Ranger), Digboi Forest Division; Mr Borsing Bey (DFO),
xiv xv
Mr Durgeswar Bharali Das and Mr Bijoy Chetiapator (Forester-I), Doom Wildlife III; Mr Bijan Talukdar, ADFO, Jalpaiguri, and other field staff in North
Dooma Forest Division; Mr M K Dhar (DFO) and Mr Nabajit Das, (Ranger), Bengal for helping the team during the groundtruthing of corridors. We also
Tinsukia Forest Division; Mr Surajit Dutta (Director), Mr S K Seal Sharma (DFO), extend our thanks to Mr Netra Prasad Sharma (Rajabhatkhawa), Mr Keshab
Mr Rabindra Sharma (Research Officer), Mr Mukul Tamuli and Mr Pradipta Gautam, Field Assistant, North Bengal for groundtruthing the corridors. Our
Baruah (Rangers), Eastern Assam Wildlife Division/Kaziranga; Mr M K Sarma, sincere thanks to Mr Zaidi A, PCCF & CWLW, West Bengal; Dr Sharma B R,
DFO, Dhansiri Forest Division, Udalguri; as well as the DFO, Wildlife Division, APCCF, WL; Mr Debal Ray, CCF, South West; Mr V K Yadav, Addl PCCF CCF/CC;
Kokrajhar and DFO, Sonitpur East for extending their support to the team Dr R P Saini, APCCF & CCF, HQ; Mr N S Murali, CCF, WL, North; Mr Kalyan Das,
during the field survey and sharing information about elephant movement CCF & CF WL, HQ; Mr Sandeep Sundriyal, CCF & FD, Buxa Tiger Reserve; Mr P
and corridors. We also extend our sincere gratitude to Mr O P Pandey, T Bhutia, CCF, WL; Mr N Singhal, CCF, WL; Mr S Mukhopadhyaya, DCF, WL, HQ;
PCCF (WL) and CWLW; Mr S S Rao, Addl PCCF (WL); Dr Abhijit Rabha, Addl Ms V V Prasida, AWLW-I and Mr Surendra Prasad Yadav, CCF, SE Circle for
PCCF, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council; Mr R K Das, DFO, Digboi Division; participating in the state consultative meeting and reviewing the draft report
Mr J S Bey, DFO, Karbi Anglong East Division; Mr Pankaj Sharma, Senior on elephant corridors of West Bengal.
Wildlife Warden, HQ; Mr Sapan Saikia, DFO, Jorhat; Mr M K Dhar, DFO,
Tinsukia Wildlife Division; Mr B N Talukdar, DCF (Rtd) and Wildlife Areas We would like to extend our appreciation and gratitude to the RCCFs of
Development & Welfare (WADW) Trust; Mr B Vasanthan, DFO, NW Division, Angul, Baripada, Berhampur, Bhawanipatna, Bhubaneswar, Rourkela and
Naogaon; Mr Naba Kumar Malakar, DFO, Sivsagar Division; Mr Raghu Nath Sambalpur for extending the support in their respective Circles. We would
Boro, DFO, WL Division, Kokrajhar; Mr Amit Sharma, WWF-India; Dr Bibhab like to thank Mr J M Mishra, DFO, Angul; Mr S N Mishra, DFO, Athmallik; Mr K
Talukdar, CEO, Aaranyak; Dr Jayanta Das, LMC, WADW Trust; Dr Jagdish N Swain, DFO, Balasore Wildlife; Mr Karthick V, DFO, Baliguda; Mr B K Panda,
Kishwan, Chief Advisor - Policy, WTI; Mr Kaushik Barua, CEO, Assam Elephant DFO, Baripada; Mr L M Patra, DFO, Boudh; Mr R K Mishra, DFO, Deogarh;
Foundation; Mr Vijay Kumar Das, Associate Lawyer, Aaranyak; Mr Nitul Nath, Mr H M Maharatha, DFO, Dhenkanal; Mr P K Sahoo, DFO, Dhenkanal; Mr
Aranya Suraksha Samiti; Ms Mubina Akhtar, Secretary, Kaziranga Wildlife G Panda, DFO, Kalahandi (North), Mr S M Singh, DFO, Kalahandi (South);
Society; Dr Anupam Sarma, Mr Pranab J Boro and Mr Hiten Kumar Baishya Mr A K Behera, DFO, Karanjia; Mr A K Jena, DFO, Keonjhar; Mr B N Thakur,
of WWF -India; and our colleagues Dr Rathin Barman and Dr Bhaskar DFO, Keonjhar Wildlife; Mr M Bodaik, DFO, Nayagarh; Mr D Behera, DFO,
Choudhary for actively participating in the consultative meeting to discuss Rairakhol; Mr A K Swain, DFO, Rairangpur; Mr R R Dash, DFO, Rayagada and
and review the draft report on elephant corridors of Assam. Mr R K Pradhan, DFO, Subarnapur and other frontline forest staff of the
state for extending all their help to the WTI team during the groundtruthing
We are grateful to Mr P T Bhutia, CCF, WL; Dr R P Saini, CCF & Field Director, of corridors. We thank the officers of Steel Authority of India Limited, Bolani
Buxa Tiger Reserve; Mr Bhaskar J V, Deputy Field Director (DFD), Buxa Tiger for their necessary help in the survey of the Karo-Karampada elephant
Reserve, East; Mr Apurba Sen, DFD, Buxa Tiger Reserve, West; Mr Madhurmilan corridor. We thank Mr Prasanna Kumar Behera, Angul for his guidance.
Ghosh, Range Officer, Hamiltonganj Range, Buxa Tiger Reserve, West; We are extremely thankful to the members of Van Surakhya Samiti (VSS)
Mr. Ratan Rai, Range Officer, Nimati Range, Buxa Tiger Reserve, West; Mr and local people of corridor dependent villages for sharing information on
Namgangla Drukpa, Range Officer, Lhamoyzingkha Range, Sarpang Division, elephant movement and other issues, and our local field assistants for their
Bhutan; Mr Rajendra Jakhar, DFO, Wildlife III; Mr Akhilesh Dutta and Mr Abhijit unconditional support. We are also thankful to Mr S S Srivathsava, PCCF
Chaudhury, Correspondence Section, Wildlife III; Ms Sweata Rai, AWLW, WL and CWLW; Mr M Mohan, CCF (WL); Mr M Badaik, DFO, Nayagar Forest
xvi xvii
Division; Mr P K Sahoo, DFO, Denkanal Forest Division; Mr S K Behera, Mr R R Hembrom, APCCF, Extension Forestry, Ranchi; Mr A K Prabhakar,
DFO, Keonjihar, WL Division; Mr P Ramasamy, DFO, Ghumsur North Forest APCCF, Development; Mr Y K Singh Chauhan, RCCF, Jhamshedpur; Mr S B
Division, Mr V Karthick, DFO, Balliguda Forest Division; Mr G Panda, DFO, Gaikwal, RCCF, Bokaro Forest Division; Mr A M Sharma, CF, Bokaro Forest
Angul Forest Division; Mr L N Behera, DFO, Mahanadi WL Division; Mr Dalai Division, Mr S C Rau, DFO, Dhanbad Forest Division; Mr C W Tripathi, RFO,
Kumar Abboug, ACF, Athamalik Forest Division; Mr Ashish Behera, DFO, Chandil; Mr N K Singh, CF; Mr Arjun Baraik, ACF; Mr Anand Premjit, DFO,
Karanjia (T) Division; Mr S Md T Rahman, DFO, Satkosia WL Division, Mr H Core Area, Project Tiger, Palamu; Mr Sanjay Kumar Singh, DFO, Garhwa
B Udgata, DFO, Balasore WL Division; Mr A K Swain, DFO, Rairanpur Forest North Forest Division; Mr Anil Kumar Mishra, DFO, Buffer Area, Palamau
Division; Mr R K Lenka, DFO, Keonjihar Forest Division; Mr Sudhansu Sekhar Tiger Reserve; Mr Ashok Kumar Singh, DFO, Lahardaga Forest Division; Mr
Khora, DFO, Rairakhol Forest Division; Mr Arun Kumar Patra, ACF, Baripada Vijay Kumar, DFO, Simdega Forest Division; Mr S R Natesha, DFO, Chaibasa
(T) Division; Mr Nimain Charan Palei and Mr Bhakta P Rath, Research Fellows, Forest Division; Mr Y K Das, CF, Chaibasa Forest Division; Mr Tiwary K K,
Odisha Forest Department for actively participating in the state consultative DFO, Saranda Forest Division; Mr S B Mishra, DFO, Kolhan Forest Division;
meeting and critically reviewing the draft elephant corridor report of Odisha. Mr Kamlesh Pandey, DFO, WLD, Ranchi Forest Division; Mr M K Singh, DFO,
Koderma Forest Division; Mr R N Mishra, DFO, WL Division, Hazaribag; Mr
We are thankful to Mr S R Natesha, DFO, Chaibasa Forest Division; Mr K Z Sunil Kumar, Dy Secretary, Forest & Environment; Mr A T Mishra, CF, Ranchi
Bhutia, DFO, Dhalbhum Forest Division; Mr Y K Das, CF, Chaibasa Forest Circle; Mr Jarak Nath, ACF, Ranchi Forest Division; Mr Rajiv Kumar Roy, DFO,
Division; Mr B Mishra, DFO, Kolhan Forest Division; Mr P K Pal, DFO, Jamtara Forest Division; Mr Manoj Singh, CF, Garhwa; Mr Rajendra Naidu,
Porahat Forest Division; Mr Kamlesh Pandey, DFO, Ranchi Wildlife Division; DFO, Chatra South Forest Division; Mr Sushil Oraon, ACF, Jamshedpur
Mr C W Tripathi, RFO, Chandil; Mr V Bhaskaran, DFO, Saraikela Forest Forest Division and Mr K M Khan, Asst Professor, Department of Zoology,
Division and Mr K K Tiwari, DFO, Saranda Forest Division, and other field Ranchi College for attending the consultative meeting and reviewing the
staff of Jharkhand Forest Division for their unconditional support to the field draft report on elephant corridors of Jharkhand.
team and for sharing the information on elephant movement and conflict.
We would also like to express our gratitude to Mr B C Nigam, PCCF, CWLW We are thankful to Mr V Gopinathan, former Chief Wildlife Warden, Kerala;
& Spl Secretary, Forest; Mr Clattiari, APCCF, Working Plan, Ranchi; Mr R R Mr Roy P Thomas, former Wildlife Warden, Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary;
Hembrom, APCCF, Extension Forestry, Ranchi; Mr A K Prabhakar, APCCF, Mr Sasikumar, former DFO, Wayanad North Forest Division; Mr George P
Development; Mr S E H Kazmi, CCF; Mr Kirti Singh, CCF, WL (Admin) Ranchi; Mathachan, former DFO, Nilambur North Forest Division; Mr Sasikumar, DFO,
Mr A K Rastogi, CCF, (Admin) Ranchi; Mr Akilesh Sharma, CCF, Personnel Palakkad Forest Division, and Mr Dhanesh Kumar P, DFO, South Wayanad
(NG), Ranchi; Mr L R Singh, CCF, Research; Mr Shambu Prasad, ACF, Bokoro Division for their support to the team while groundtruthing the corridors and
Forest Division; Ms Smitha Pankaj, DFO, Giridih East Forest Division; Mr J P for providing elephant-related information from their division. We would also
Keshri, DFO, Giridih West; Mr V Jayaram, CF - WP, Hazaribag; Mr Narendra like to express our sincere thanks to Mr Pramod G Krishnan, CCF (WL) Palakkad;
Prasad, CF, Territorial Circle, Gumla; Mr Dinesh Kumar, CF, Plantation Dr P S Easa, Former Director, Kerala Forest Research Institute; Mr Ratheesan
Research, Er Ranchi; Mr Kulwant Singh, CF, Planning Circle, Ranchi; Mr P K V, Range Forest Officer (RFO), Kottiyur Range, Kannur Forest Division; Mr Vimal
Verma, RCCF, Ranchi; Mr A K Pandey, CCF, Wildlife; Mr Nandkedyar Shashi, M, ACF, Wildlife, Palakkad Forest Division; Mr Srinivas Vaidyanathan, Senior
RCCF, Santhal Pangare, Dumka; Mr J P N Sinha, CF, Deoghar; Mr Rajiv Ranjan, Fellow – Foundation for Ecological Research, Advocacy and Learning; Mr C
DFO, Derghor Forest Division; Mr S K Suman, DFO, Dumka Forest Division; T Joju, ACF, Nilambur North Forest Division; Mr Sasikumar, DFO, Palakkad
xviii xix
Forest Division, Ms Geetha K , Deputy Director, Wildlife Education, Palakkad; Trust, Mysore; Mr Kalidasan K, OSAI, Coimbatore and Mr Gopalakrishna S P,
Mr Mohd Sahear C K, RFO, Kollangode Range, Nilambur Division; Mr Raji Associate Professor, Registrar, SASF Rai Technology University for attending
Thomas K, DFO, Mannarkkad Forest Division; Mr Anjankumar B N, Deputy the elephant corridor state consultative meeting and reviewing the draft
Director, Parambikulam Tiger Reserve; Mr Rajesh N, DFO, Nenmara; Mr Viju report on elephant corridors of Karnataka.
Varghese, Wildlife Warden, Peechi; Ms Silpa V Kumar, Wildlife Warden (WLW),
Silent Valley National Park; Mr Narendra Nath, DFO, North Wayanad Division; We are extremely grateful to Mr Rakesh Vasisht, former CWLW, Tamil Nadu;
Mr Dhanesh Kumar P, DFO, South Wayanad & WLW, Wayanad WLS; Mr Saji Dr Raghuram Singh, former CCF & FD, Mudumalai Tiger Reserve; Dr Rajeev
K (DFO, Nilabur South Division; Mr Jayasankar S, Technical Assistant, Eastern K Srivastava, former CCF & FD, Anamalai Tiger Reserve; Mr I Anwardeen,
Circle; Mr Sunil Kumar K K, DFO, Nilambur North Division; Mr Johnson D C, Conservator of Forests, Coimbatore Circle; Mr Rajkumar, former DFO,
RFO, Karimala; Mr Akhil V B, RFO, Periya Range, North Wayanad Division; Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve; Mr T K Ashok Kumar, Wildlife Warden,
Mr Krishnadas K R, Asst WLW, Sulthan Bathery Range; Mr Ranjith Kumar P, Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary and Mr Ulaganathan, DFO,
RFO, Chedleth Range; Mr Ajith K Raman, Asst WLW, Kurichiat Range and Mr Hosur Forest Division for their help and support to the team during the field
James Zacharias, former DFO, Kerala Forest Department for attending the survey and groundtruthing. Our sincere thanks to Dr Anand Kumar, Nature
state elephant corridor consultative meeting at Palakkad and reviewing the Conservation Foundation (NCF) for providing us the information on two new
draft report on elephant corridors of Kerala. corridors in Valparai region We would also like to thank Dr V K Melkani, PCCF &
CWLW; Dr H Basavaraju, APCCF (WL); Dr Raghuram Singh, APCCF, Project Tiger;
We express our sincere thanks to Mr Sadhasivaiya, former Conservator of Mr Limatoshi, CCF, Biodiversity Conservation; Mr Dinkar Kumar, CF, Vellore; Mr
Forests, Mysore Forest Circle; Mr S S Lingaraja, Field Director, BRT Tiger A K Ulaganathan, CF, Dharmapuri Circle; Mr T K Ashok Kumar, WL Warden,
Reserve; Mr Ravi Shankar, former DCF, Chamrajanagar Forest Division; Ms Srivilliputhur GGS WLS; Mr D Venkatesh, DFO, Kodaikanal Forest Division; Mr
Geethanjali, former DCF, Kollegal Forest Division; Ms Malathi Priya, WLW, A Venkatesh, CCF & Field Director; Mr R Srinivas Reddy, CCF & Field DIrector,
Malai Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary; Mr Hemand Rao, DFO, Pushpagiri Mudumalai Tiger Reserve; Mr M Senthil Kumar, DFO, Coimbatore Forest
Wildlife Sanctuary; Mr Sunil Panwar, DCF, Bannerghatta National Park; Division; Mr Thejasvi S N, DFO, Gudalur Forest Division; Mr Samartha J R, ACF,
Mr H C Kantha Raju, Field Director & CF, Bandipur National Park; Wildlife Hosur Forest Division; Dr T S Dange, Director, Ramnad; Dr V T Kandasamy,
Warden, Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary and other staff of the Karnataka Anamalai TR Division, Pollachi; Mr K Rajkumar, DFO, Sathyamangalam Forest;
Forest Department for extending their support to the team during the field Mr K Dhanapal, DFO, Attur; Prof R Sukumar, CES, Indian Institute of Science,
survey. We are also thankful to Mr Ajay Misra, APCCF (WL); Mr Manoj Kumar, Bangalore; Mr Ajay A Desai, Former Co-Chair, IUCN AsESG and Consultant,
CCF, Kodagu Circle, Madikeri; Mr M K Holarajappa, ACF, Bannerghatta WWF-India; Dr N Baskaran, Asst Professor, Department of Zoology, AVC
National Park; Mr Sunil Panwar, DCF, Bannerghatta National Park; Mr H College, Mayiladuthurai; Dr B Ramakrishnan, Asst Professor, Division of Wildlife
C Kantha Raju, Director & CF, Bandipur National Park; Mr S S Lingaraja, Biology, Government Arts College, Ooty; Dr C Arivazhagan, Managing Trustee,
Field Director & CF, BRT Tiger Reserve; Mr R Uday Kumar, APCCF (Project Indo American Wildlife Society; Mr K Kalidasan, Member, Tamil Nadu State
Elephant); Mr R M Manjunatha, Range Forest Officer, Bannerghatta; Prof R Wildlife Board & President, OSAI environmental organisation; Mr R Arumugam,
Sukumar, Centre for Ecological Sciences (CES), Indian Institute of Science, Biologist, ATR, Pollachi and Mr D Boominathan, WWF-India for participating in
Bangalore; Dr A J T Johnsingh, NCF, Mysore; Dr M D Madhusudan, NCF, the state consultative meeting on elephant corridors and reviewing the draft
Mysore; Mr Sudheer K S, Advocate & Managing Trustee, Voice for Wildlife elephant corridor report of Tamil Nadu.
xx xxi
Our thanks also go out to our colleagues at WIldlife Trust of India, Mr Sunil
Kyarong, Joint Director; Mr Dilip Deori, Manager; Dr Bhaskar Choudhury,
eXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Co-ordinator, Dr Rathin Barman, Joint Director, Mr Balsreng Sangma, Field
Officer; Mr Adrish Poddar, Programme Officer; Mr Sumanta Kundu, former
THE FRAGMENTATION AND LOSS OF NATURAL HABITATS are major
Field Officer; Mr Subrat Behera, Assistant Manager; Dr Rajendra Mishra,
drivers of ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss globally. Mega-
Manager; Mr Dinesh Pandey, Field Officer; Mr Sabu Jahas, former Manager
herbivores such as elephants, with large home range and food requirements,
& Advisor; Mr Ramith M, Field Officer; Mr Shajan M A, Field Officer, Mr
have been among the species most affected by habitat alteration and loss
Rathnakumar S, former Field Officer, Mr Rudra Mahapatra, Asst Manager; Mr
of habitat connectivity. The fragmented nature of the Indian landscape, with
Ved Prakash, Field Assistant and Ms Upasana Ganguly, Programme Officer for
people all around, has increased human-elephant conflict in most parts of the
groundtruthing corridors and helping the team and consultants to undertake
country. On an average about 400-450 people lose their lives annually due to
the survey. Sincere thanks to our GIS team, Ms Smitha Bodhankar, Ms Kasturi
such conflict in India, and around 100 elephants are killed in retaliation for the
Deb and Ms Poonam Chandel for GIS assistance and processing GIS images.
damage they cause to human life and property.
We would also like to thank Mr Pranav Capila and Ms Rupa Gandhi Chaudhury
for editing the report and Ms Anjali Pathak for the layout.
Various strategies are being discussed and debated to manage and overcome
the adverse effects of habitat fragmentation and loss. Wildlife corridors are
We would also like to thank our consultants Mr Kalaimani A, Mr Samson A and Mr
an important means of ensuring larger habitat availability to species, genetic
Manivel from Tamil Nadu and Karnataka; Mr Amrendra Singh from Jharkhand;
exchange within and between populations, and the minimising of human-
Mr Mithun Biswas for a part of the corridor groundtruthing in North Bengal; Mr
elephant conflict in altered habitats. These corridors have to be restored and
Vipul Mauriya from Uttarakhand; Mr Deepankar Barman for Arunachal Pradesh
secured on a priority basis.
and Assam; Mr Ben Teron from Meghalaya; Mr Rahul Singh from Nagaland;
and Mr Sandeep Chauksi from Chhattisgarh for groundtruthing the corridors.
Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) and the Asian Nature Conservation Foundation
We also extend our thanks to Mr Surendra Varma, Dr B Ramakrishnan, Mr
(ANCF), in collaboration with state forest departments, Project Elephant and
Arumugam, Dr N Baskaran, Dr Anil Kumar Singh, Dr M Anand and Mr Gahar
several researchers, had identified 88 elephant corridors and published
Abedin for helping the team with information on corridors. We are also thankful
a report titled Right of Passage: Elephant Corridors of India in 2005. This
to Dr Prajna Paramita Panda for coordinating with the Ministry.
publication systematically assessed the status of the 88 identified corridors,
and prioritised them for conservation interventions and securing. The
We would like to thank Elephant Family and Project Elephant, Ministry of
report was endorsed by Project Elephant, Ministry of Environment and
Environment, Forest and Climate Change for their financial assistance to
Forests*, and all state forest departments. In the last decade, the Ministry of
this project to undertake the groundtruthing of corridors and organising
Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC), state forest departments
the consultative meeting to discuss the draft elephant corridor report in
and conservation organisations have been working at the policy and ground
elephant range states. We would also like to thank our international partner
level to protect and secure these corridors. The elephant task force formed
the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), as well as IUCN Netherland
in 2010 also recognised these corridors and strongly recommended that they
and World Land Trust and Elephant Family, UK, for their financial and technical
be legally protected and secured through various approaches.
support to secure the corridors.
* as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) was known at the time.
xxii 1
Over the years, the MoEF&CC, state forest departments, WTI, ANCF and other However, on a regional basis, about 39.1% of the corridors in North-eastern
conservation organisations have been working to secure these corridors India and 32.14% of the corridors in Southern India are of one kilometre or
through land securement, voluntary relocation of people and conservation less, pointing to what the overall findings indicate: that the fragmentation of
easement by working with local communities. However, due to a lack of legal elephant habitats is less severe in these regions (and most severe in Northern
protection to corridors and Elephant Reserves, and land use changes that have West Bengal followed by North-western and Central India).
occurred in the last decade, elephant habitats and corridors have been further
negatively impacted. A field survey was consequently initiated by Wildlife Trust Human settlements and the resulting biotic pressure, linear infrastructure
of India in collaboration with Project Elephant from July 2013 to December elements (roads, railway lines, canals), and encroachments onto corridor
2015, to update the status of existing corridors and identify new ones that areas are major issues impacting connectivities. Only 21.8% of corridors
may have emerged in the intervening decade, and prepare conservation are free of human settlements compared to 22.8% in 2005, and 45.5%
plans for securing them. The information collected from corridors in all have one to three settlements compared to 42% in 2005. A large extent of
states was compiled into a draft report that was reviewed through state-level corridor area and habitat is also being lost due to encroachment, with 28.7%
consultative meetings with officials of state forest departments, conservation of corridors now encroached upon. Some 66.3% of corridors also have
organisations working on elephants, elephant experts and others. The final highways (national and/or state) passing through them. Twenty corridors
list of corridors and the conservation plan for each corridor incorporated the already have railway lines passing through them and in four, a railway line
suggestions and comments of those present at the consultative meetings. has been proposed or construction work is in progress. An estimated 36.4%
Whenever a new corridor was suggested, the team surveyed the area and if of corridors in Uttarakhand, 32% in Central India, 35.7% in Northern West
convinced, formally incorporated it into the final list as an elephant corridor. Bengal and 13% in North-eastern India have railway lines passing through
them. (Between 1987 and June 2017, approximately 265 elephants have
STATUS OF CORRIDORS been killed by train accidents in different part of the country.) About 40% of
A minimum of 101 elephant corridors were identified as currently in use in the corridors in Central India and 27% in North-western India are affected
India, and seven corridors that were previously identified were found to have by irrigation canals. Overall, 11% of the corridors are affected by canals.
been impaired in the last decade. Of the corridors currently in use, 28 are in Further, 11.9% of corridors are affected by mining and/or boulder extraction.
Southern India, 25 in Central India, 23 in North-eastern India, 14 in Northern Corridors also pass through agriculture lands and/or are encroached upon
West Bengal and 11 in North-western India. An estimated 69.3% of these for cultivation: about 2/3rd of them are affected by agriculture activities. All
corridors are being regularly used by elephants, either around the year or in a these developmental activities and biotic pressures have severely impacted
particular season, and 24.7% are being used occasionally. Some 57.5% of the elephant movement.
corridors are of high priority ecologically, and 41.5% are of medium priority,
indicating that most of the corridors are important for elephant movement In terms of land use, only 12.9% of the corridors are totally under forest
and to maintain a healthy population. cover compared to 24% in 2005; 44.5% are jointly under forest, agriculture
and settlements compared to 40% in 2005; and 15.85% are under forest,
Only 22.8% of the corridors are one kilometre or less in length compared to tea gardens and settlements as compared to 16% in 2005. In Central India,
28.5% in 2005, and 17.8% of corridors are between one and three kilometres almost 88% of corridors are jointly under forest, agriculture and settlements
compared to 19.3% in 2005, suggesting the further fragmentation of habitats. and only 4% are totally under forest cover, compared to about 35.7% of
2 3
CONSERVATION REFERENCE SERIES #3
corridors in Southern India that are totally under forest cover. Almost 47.5% corridors. GCCs will be charged with sensitising, motivating and mobilising
of the corridors have a Protected Area at one or both ends, or lie within a local communities, and creating a sense of pride and ownership among them
Protected Area. towards elephant corridors. They will work to secure and monitor the status
of corridors by coordinating the actions of local self-governments, state and
To ensure that corridors are protected and secured, it is important that central governments, and other stakeholders.
they are legally protected to prevent further fragmentation of habitat and
increased human-elephant conflict. To achieve this, state governments should
first demarcate and notify these corridors as State Elephant Corridors, which
could then be legally protected under appropriate sections of the Wild Life
(Protection) Act, 1972, the Environment Protection Act, and other laws. Wildlife
Trust of India also recommends that wherever possible, the state forest
department, Project Elephant and conservation organisations should make
efforts to protect and secure corridor lands through purchase and voluntary
relocation of inhabitants. Corridors could also be secured by working with
the local communities and governments (Autonomous District Councils) to
reduce local dependency on corridor land, and getting the corridors notified
as Village Reserve Forests by the Council or Community Reserves by the state
forest department.
Development policies in elephant habitats should be thoroughly discussed,

involving various stakeholders to prevent further fragmentation and
degradation and a consequent rise in human-elephant conflict. While
planning infrastructure development in such regions, appropriate
mitigation measures should be finalised during the planning stages to
minimise impact. The overall policy in these areas should aim towards the
long-term conservation of wildlife by ensuring the protection of larger
forest areas.
Seven corridors have been impaired in the past decade and many more are
on the verge of being impaired. This has been due to the lack of any agency
keeping a close eye on these corridors so that land use changes could be
detected in time and mitigation measures initiated. Hence, it is important
to engage local community-based organisations in corridor areas as ‘Green
Corridor Champions’ (GCCs), who will work as the eyes, ears and voice of Fig. 1.01: A herd of wild elephants in Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary, Jharkhand
4 5
01 THE ELEPHANT HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED as an

embodiment of strength, size and intelligence. It has been looked upon with
mixed feelings of love, worship and fear. The human culture in elephant range
ASIAN ELEPHANTS IN INDIA: countries is so closely associated with the elephant that it was the subject of a
A REVIEW number of classical works of literature. Elephants were also a part of human
P S Easa society and were maintained in captivity for use in war, festivals, timber
logging and religious processions.
Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) once ranged over a vast area from the
Tigris and Euphrates in West Asia to South East Asia (Olivier, 1978). However,
their present distribution is confined to Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar,
China, India, Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand
and Vietnam (Santiapillai, 1987; Sukumar 2011). Though the number of
Asian elephants in the wild is estimated to be 45,826-53,306 (IUCN AsESG
2016, unpublished), they are threatened because of the loss, shrinkage and
degradation of their habitat. Fragmentation of available habitats has confined
most of the populations to small islands. In addition, the threat from poaching
for ivory has considerably depleted the number of tuskers, most often leading
to a highly skewed sex ratio. Developmental programmes and encroachment
within and around elephant habitats has also led to the loss of the elephants’
traditional movement paths. All these factors have contributed to increased
human–elephant conflict, which has often led to the loss of both human and
elephant lives. On an average about 400 to 450 humans lose their lives due
to human-elephant conflict in India and around 100 elephants are killed in
retaliation for the damage they cause to human life and property.
The historical range of the elephant in India has shrunk, confining elephants
into distinct geographical zones (Jerdon, 1874; Ali, 1927; Daniel, 1980).
Elephants in the Andaman and Nicobar islands are considered to be feral
and are the descendants of a captive stock. The Indian subcontinent has an
estimated population of about 27,312 elephants (MoEFCC, 2017), which is
<< Elephant herd, Corbett Tiger

Reserve, Uttarakhand
7
about 55% of the world population. These range in 29 Elephant Reserves Dibrugarh, Sibsagar, Jorhat and Golaghat in Assam, and Mon, Tuensang,
spread over 10 elephant landscapes in 14 states, covering about 65,814 sq Mokokchung and Wokha in Nagaland. The population lost its contiguity with
km of forests in northeast, central, north-west and south India. the north bank in the 1970s and the central area of South Bank in the 1980s
(Choudhury, 1995 and 1999). An estimated 1200 elephants occupy about
THE NORTH-EASTERN POPULATION 4500 sq km of forests in the area, though they also use tea plantations and
Elephants in north-eastern India range in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, agricultural lands as they move.
Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura (between 21°
58’–29° 27’ N and 89° 42’–97° 24’ E). The elephant population in the north-east The population in the central area extends from Kaziranga National Park
was contiguous with that of Bhutan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar. The across the Karbi Plateau, parts of the central Brahmaputra plains and the
9650-odd elephants (MoEFCC, 2017) in the region are now discontinuously basin of the Diyung river, to the foot of Meghalaya plateau in Assam and
distributed and exist as 15 populations in an area of about 8900 sq km Meghalaya. These elephants are
(Choudhury, 1999). The range extends from near northern West Bengal (near separated from the south bank Asian elephants
the Indo-Nepal international border), along the Himalayan foothills up to the and western population due to the
are threatened because
Mishmi Hills and the eastern Brahmaputra plains of Assam and Arunachal expansion of Guwahati city, clearing
Pradesh (Choudhury and Menon, unpublished draft Action Plan). Then it takes of forests for jhumming and human
of poaching as well as
a ‘U’ turn and covers eastern Arunachal Pradesh, the plains of upper Assam habitation along National Highway 40 the loss, shrinkage and
and the foothills of the Naga Hills, the Garo Hills of Meghalaya through the which connects Guwahati to Shillong. degradation of their
Khasi Hills, parts of the Brahmaputra plains and the Karbi plateau. Elsewhere The extent of elephant habitat is habitats. Fragmentation
in the south, scattered populations survive. Choudhury (1991, 1992, 1995, about 5050 sq km with an estimated of available habitats
1999 and 2001), Williams and Johnsingh (1996 a and b), Gurung and Lahiri population of 2900-3000. has also confined most
Choudhury (2000), Marak (2002) and Tiwari et al. (2008) give details of
elephant populations to
elephant conservation issues in the area. The elephant population in the
small islands.
western areas is seen in parts of
The elephant population on the north bank of Brahmaputra extends from Assam and Meghalaya along the foot
northern West Bengal through the Himalayan foothills and the bhabar-terai of the Meghalaya plateau covering the Garo and Khasi Hills. It also covers the
tract (called the Duars in this part of the country) touching southern Bhutan, Kamrup and Goalpara districts in Assam, and Ri-Bhoi, the West Khasi Hills, East
northern Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. In eastern Assam, the range also Garo Hills, West Garo Hills and South Garo Hills in Meghalaya. The seasonal
covers part of the floodplains of the Brahmaputra and Lohit Rivers. An area range of this population also extends to areas of Bangladesh, though that
of about 7900 sq km is available to an estimated population of 2700–3000. has been now hindered due to fencing along the international boundary. The
habitat available to an estimated 2500 elephants is about 6850 sq km.
Elephants on the south bank of the Brahmaputra are divided into eastern,
central and western populations. The eastern population is spread over lower There are also a few isolated populations in Dhansiri-Intanki covering part of
Dibang Valley, Lohit, Changlang and Tirap in Arunachal Pradesh, Tinsukia, the Karbi Anglong district of Assam and the Kohima district of Nagaland. This
8 9
includes the Dhansiri and Daldali Reserve Forests in Karbi Anglong and Intanki The terai and the western Duars region of North Bengal has patchy forest
Sanctuary in Kohima. About 300–350 elephants are estimated in about 1050 with human habitation and tea gardens through which regular movement of
sq km of territory. Elephants regularly move between Dhansiri and Intanki elephants occurs.
across the inter-state boundary. Inside Assam, they move between Dhansiri
and Daldali and adjacent forests affected by human pressure. A population THE NORTH-WESTERN POPULATION
of elephants numbering about 35-40 is distributed in the Barail-Jaintia Hills The north-western elephant population in India was once distributed over
along the southern face of the Barail Range of Assam and the Jaintia Hills of parts of Uttar Pradesh from Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary to the Yamuna
Meghalaya. The population is small, scattered and considered non-viable. River (Singh, 1978). Currently elephants range across about 9000 sq km of
forests in the outer Himalaya and the Shivalik Hills and parts of the terai and
A small population of elephants also occurs in the forests of Tripura, especially bhabar tracts. About 2040 elephants (MoEFCC, 2017) are distributed in six
in the southern areas of Dholai district. A few elephants exist in an area of isolated populations: from west to east, these populations include those
about 2100 sq km in Dampa Tiger Reserve of Mizoram and Gumti Wildlife between the Yamuna and the Ganga
Sanctuary in Tripura. This tiny population is in contiguity with the population River, the Ganga and Khoh river, the
The growing human
of the Chittagong Hill Tracts in Bangladesh. Two herds of about eight Khoh and Haldwani, the Haldwani and
population in Uttar
elephants were also reported from Ngengpui sanctuary and two or three are Sharda river, in and around Dudhwa
reported in Palak Dil area of Saiha district. A small herd is distributed in an area Tiger Reserve, and those of the
Pradesh has encroached
of about 140 sq km in the Tilbhum, Longai and Patharia Hill forests of southern Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary. The on elephant habitats;
Assam. The Laokhowa and Burhachapori Wildlife Sanctuaries have a population major breaks in this elephant range people living on forest
of about five to 10 elephants. The four to five elephants in Orang National Park, are along the Ganga River, along the fringes depend on the
40-45 in Amcheng Hills Reserve Forests and 30-35 in Gibbon Wildlife Sanctuary Gola River, along the Sharda canal, forest for fuel, fodder
are the other small populations in Assam. and between Dudhwa National Park and small timber.
and Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary
THE NORTHERN WEST BENGAL POPULATION thus severely hindering elephant
The elephants in northern West Bengal form the western-most extension of movement. In several other places, the habitat connectivity is under severe
the north-east Indian elephant population. There are about 488 elephants threat of breaking up.
in this region (MoEFCC, 2017) spread over the Darjeeling and Jalpaiguri
districts, covering nine forest divisions. Although the elephant population in The elephant habitat in the north-west includes seven Protected Areas, viz.
this region is only about 1% of the total elephant population of India, the Corbett National Park, Rajaji National Park, Sonanadi Wildlife Sanctuary,
human-elephant conflict is among the highest in the country. Northern West Nandhaur Wildlife Sanctuary, Dudhwa National Park, Kishanpur Wildlife
Bengal has a forest area of 3051 sq km covering about 25.7% of the total Sanctuary and Katerniaghat Wildlife Division. The altitude varies from 200–
geographical area of the region (Das, undated). However, the elephant holding 1000 m. The vegetation in this tract comprises mostly moist and dry sal
area is mostly confined to an elevation of 900 m and the elephant habitat is forests interspersed with northern tropical dry deciduous forests, northern
about 2000 sq km, which lies in the terai, western Duars and eastern Duars. tropical moist deciduous forests, and bamboo thickets. Himalayan sub-
10 11
tropical forests, cane brakes, seasonal swamp forests, and plantations of

teak, eucalyptus, poplar and Ailanthus are also present.
The elephants in the range form six populations, with the 250-300 elephants
west of the Ganga River occupying about 1500 sq km; about 1200 elephants
between the Ganga and Gola Rivers occupying 4000 sq km; and just 100
elephants occupying the 1800 sq km stretch between the Gola and Sharda
Rivers. About 50-75 elephants are distributed over 2500 sq km between
Khatima Range and Katerniaghat.
A rise in the human population and consequent increase in developmental

activities has led to the fragmentation and degradation of the remaining
elephant habitat. A number of breaks have been identified in this elephant
range and about 11 crucial corridors have also been identified. Humans
have encroached on elephant habitat as they depend on the forest for fuel,
fodder and timber. The dependence on forest land to graze livestock, the and
conversion of natural forests into monoculture plantations of tea, eucalyptus
etc, have degraded the habitat and exotics like Lantana and Parthenium have
taken root. The impact of Gujjar settlements on the habitat is multifarious:
lopping of trees, overgrazing and the use of waterholes by buffaloes are a
few of the problems to be addressed (Dabadghao and Shankarnarayan, 1973;
Johnsingh et al., 1990; Johnsingh and Joshua, 1994). The railway tracks passing
through Rajaji National Park and Dudhwa Tiger Reserve also cause a major
direct impact on elephants. Twenty-three elephants were killed by train-hits
in Rajaji National Park between 1987 and May 2017. Though the collective
efforts of WTI, the Northern Railways and the Uttarakhand Forest Department
have succeeded in averting accidents since 2003 in all but two cases (Menon
et al., 2003; Singh et al., 2011, WII 2016), the problem is perennial and needs
to be addressed for a permanent solution.
Sunderraj et al. (1995), Javed (1996), Williams (2002), Johnsingh et al. (2004) ,
Joshi, et al. (2010), and Menon et al. (2003) have dealt with the conservation
problems of the area. Conservation measures requiring immediate attention
Fig. 1.02: An elephant in Corbett Tiger Reserve, Uttarakhand
12 13
are the maintenance of identified elephant corridors, especially the Gola About 50% of the elephant population is found in 11 (viz. Similipal National
corridor, to ensure elephant movement, and the rehabilitation of Gujjars Park, Similipal Wildlife Sanctuary, Hadgarh, Kuldiha, Satkosia Gorge, Baisipali,
and other human settlements outside the national park. A large number of Chandaka-Dampara, Kotgarh, Lakhari, Khalasuni and Badarma) of the 19
workers are engaged in sand and boulder mining in the river beds within sanctuaries in the state. The remaining 50% of the population is found outside
the Gola Reserve Forest, adding more pressure on the surrounding habitat. the Protected Area network, making it the primary concern for human-
Encroachment upon corridor forest and habitat, and biotic pressures caused elephant conflict in the state. Three Elephant Reserves, viz. Mayurbhanj,
by an increasing human population, are other threats to the landscape. Mahanadi and Sambalpur have also been declared. Chowdhury (unpublished
Habitat improvement programmes have to be carried out to make this a draft Action Plan) identifies four zones of larger elephant habitats in Odisha
better elephant habitat. and two in Jharkhand. The first, including Similipal Tiger Reserve and the
Kuldiha and Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuaries, has an area of 3200 sq km with
THE CENTRAL POPULATION an estimated population of about 500 elephants. This zone along with the
The elephant habitats in central India extend over 21,000 sq km in the states adjacent forests of Noto and Garsahi
of Odisha, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and southern West Bengal, at times could be an ideal habitat for the long- The central Indian
extending to Madhya Pradesh and Bihar, and hold a population of about 3128 term conservation of elephants. The elephant habitat is one
elephants (MoEFCC, 2017). Biogeographically, this region falls in the Chhota Satkosia-Baisipalli zone, situated in of the most fragmented
Nagpur plateau in the north of the Eastern Ghats (Rodgers and Panwar, 1988). central Odisha, has the Satkosia Gorge
and degraded because
A major portion of the forests of Jharkhand, southern West Bengal and north- and Baisipalli Wildlife Sanctuaries. This,
of encroachment,
western portions of Odisha is deciduous. The elephant habitats in Chhota with the adjacent 800 sq km of reserve
Nagpur are in the Palamau, Singhbhum and Dalbhum forests. To the north of forests, could form a larger landscape shifting cultivation and
the Mahanadi River, elephants are distributed in Baripada, Karanjia, Keonjhar, of about 1760 sq km (Chowdhury, mining activities.
Bamra, Rairakhol, Angul, Dhenkenal, Athamalik and Athgarh Forest Divisions unpublished draft Action Plan).
in Odisha. The Eastern Ghats extending from the south of the Mahanadi
River upto Mahendragiri, Boudh, Nayagarh, Phulbani, Baliguda, Kalahandi, The south Keonjhar plateau, with about 2600 sq km of elephant habitat is
Raygada, Parilakhmundi and Ghumsur North Forest Divisions in Odisha form spread over the Deogan, Ghatgan and Telkoi Ranges of Keonjhar Forest
the elephant habitat in the area. Singh (1989), Datye (1995), Tiwari (2000), Division, and the Kamkhya and West Ranges of Dhenkanal Division. The area
Nigam (2002), Swain and Patnaik (2002), Sar and Lahiri Choudhury (2002), is believed to have about 200–250 elephants. Madanpur-Rampur-Kotgarh-
Singh et al. (2002), Sar et al. (2004), Biswal et al. (2010), Pradhan et al. (2013), Chandrapur zone in the Eastern Ghats has about 800 sq km of habitat, of
Palei et al. (2013) Palei (2014), Mishra and Bisht (2016) etc have dealt with which about 80% is fragmented due to shifting cultivation. About 300–400
elephants of the area. elephants are estimated to be present in this area.
Odisha has about 57% of the elephant habitat in central India with 1900 Jharkhand has two distinct elephant populations, viz. Palamau and Singhbhum,
elephants spread over about 11,000 sq km (Swain and Patnaik, 2002). The and about 678 elephants (MoEFCC, 2017). The Palamau population occupies
state has elephants in 44 out of 50 Forest Divisions. about 1200 sq km of Betla National Park, Palamau Tiger Reserve and adjoining
14 15
areas. In recent years, elephants have started moving into new areas of The elephant habitat in Midnapore, Bankura and Purulia districts in the
Hazaribagh, Ranchi, Ramgarh, Bokaro, Dhanbad, Giridih, Deogarh, Dumka, southern part of West Bengal are considered as range extensions of the
Pakur, Godda and Sahibganj, passing through fragmented forest patches, adjoining Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary of Jharkhand. The area comprises tropical
agricultural land and human settlements. Elephants have also started moving moist deciduous forests interspersed with dry deciduous forests. About 100-
to Bihar and West Bengal from these areas. This has increased human-elephant 125 elephants move annually to West Bengal during the paddy season from
conflict, especially crop depredation, and has become a major challenge for the September to February. There is also a resident population of about 50-60
division managers to with respect to minimising conflict. This zone harbours elephants in the region. The area is mostly under agricultural cultivation with
approximately 100-125 elephants. The second zone of Dingbhum-Dalbhum- no Protected Areas. The Mayurjharna Elephant Reserve with an area of 414
Bonai comprises 2900 sq km of forests and includes the Saranda, Kolhan and sq km has been declared to conserve about 100-plus elephants.
Porahat Forest Divisions. This is contiguous with the Joda and Koira Ranges of
the Bonai Division of Odisha and Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary of Jharkhand. Only There have been recent reports of elephants straying into Madhya Pradesh’s
350–450 elephants are found in this zone. eastern districts of Singrauli and Anuppur from bordering northern
Chhattisgarh, causing concern among the locals and forest officials.
Chhattisgarh was known to have elephants several centuries ago, with Surguja Elephants in recent years have also been reported in Bhagalpur, Banka and
and Korba having a history of elephant capture for the Mughal army. The Jamui Districts (from Jharkhand) and Supaul, Araria, Kishanganj and west
area did not have elephants for a long period subsequently. The forests in Champaran (from Nepal).
northern Chhattisgarh, comprising Surguja, Korba, Raigarh, Jashpur, Surajpur,
Mungeli and Korea districts, presently harbour some 247 elephants (MoEFCC, The central Indian elephant habitats are one of the most fragmented
2017). About 14 elephants have died due to electrocution from 2005 to 2014. and degraded because of encroachment, shifting cultivation and mining
Between 2009 and 2015, 164 human lives have been lost due to human- activities. The northern part of Odisha has the highest number of iron ore,
elephant conflict. manganese and chromate mines. The southern part has about 9% of the
total forest area under shifting cultivation. There have been 398 human
In addition, there are five isolated populations in Odisha and three in Jharkhand. deaths in Odisha, 354 deaths in Jharkhand and 164 deaths in Chhattisgarh
The Bamra Hills has two Protected Areas, viz. Khalasuni and Badarma. This from 2009 to 2015. According to a report (Palei et al., 2014), 119 elephants
constitutes an Elephant Reserve with a population of 257 elephants in an died in Odisha due to intentional or accidental electrocution between 2001
area of 427 sq km. The Kapilas and Chandaka-Dampara Wildlife Sanctuaries and 2012.
also hold about 40-50 and 20-30 elephants respectively. The Lakhari Valley
Wildlife Sanctuary has about 50–60 elephants in an area of 185 sq km. About THE SOUTHERN POPULATION
10–15 elephants are spread over an area of 130 sq km in Mahendragiri. The The south Indian population is distributed over the Western Ghats and parts
three isolated populations in Jharkhand are: of the Eastern Ghats in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh
a) Hazaribagh, Chatra and Gaya (Sukumar, 1989). About 11,935 elephants (MoEFCC, 2017) are reported from
b) Ranchi and Gumla the region. Most of the elephant ranges in this region are hilly with tropical
c) Rom-Musabani forests. wet evergreen, semi-evergreen, moist deciduous, dry deciduous and dry
16 17
thorn forests in addition to high altitude shola grasslands and plantations. The Bhadra-Malnad area also holds a small population. The Malnad plateau
Elephants in the south could be considered to consist of eight populations on the east of the Western Ghats is separated from the rest of the tract by
based on habitat contiguity (Sukumar and Easa, unpublished draft Action coffee plantations and other cultivations. The elephant habitat of about 827
Plan). Easa (1989, 1994), Sivaganesan (1991), Sukumar (1989), Syam Prasad sq km is mostly in the Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary and is considered to have
and Reddy (2002), Baskaran (2013) and Madhusudan et al. (2015) describe tenuous links with the Pushpagiri and Brahmagiri Range.
various aspects of elephant conservation in the region.
The Brahmagiri-Nilgiris-Eastern Ghats population extends from the Brahmagiri
About seven elephants appeared in Andhra Pradesh in 1984 and established Hills to the south through the Eastern Ghats in the states of Karnataka, Tamil
themselves in the dry deciduous forests of Koundinya Wildlife Sanctuary. A second Nadu and Kerala, with a splinter group in Andhra Pradesh. About 6300-6500
herd of 22 joined the first in 1986 (Syam Prasad and Reddy, 2002). The population elephants are distributed over 12,000 sq
is reported to be on the increase and occupies an area of about 356 sq km. km of habitat. A number of the Protected With diverse
Areas including Bandipur, Nagarahole,
vegetation types, a
In 2002, a herd moved to the Sindhudurg district of Maharashtra from Mudumalai, Wayanad, Biligirirangan
Karnataka and established itself. Elephants also entered the Kolhapur Swamy Temple, Kaveri and Brahmagiri
number of cash crop
district in 2004. The elephants have been using certain routes regularly in fall within the area. The diversity in cultivated areas, and
Sindhudurg and Sawantwadi. In the initial one or two years they mainly resided vegetation, ranging from dry thorn forest human settlements,
in the Tilari catchment area and around the villages of Shirange and Konal, to the montane shola grasslands, make the Brahmagiri-
which are downstream of the Tilari Dam. In Kolhapur district the elephants this one of the best Elephant Reserves in Nilgiris-Eastern Ghats
were distributed mainly in the Chandgad and Gadhinglaj talukas, moving the country with a demographically and landscape is one of
from Chandgad to Gadhinglaj via Kamewadi, Nesri, Batkanangle, Teginhal, genetically viable population. This is the
the most complex in
Masewadi, Naukud, Channekuppi to the Hukkeri district of the Karnataka largest population of elephants in the
terms of conservation
boundary. Though very small in number, this population has created a lots of country and possibly in Asia as well.
problems by way of crop raiding and human deaths.
challenges.
The diverse vegetation types and a
Northern Karnataka is considered the northern-most limit of elephant number of cash crop cultivated areas and human settlements make this
distribution in south India and elephants are distributed in the Uttara Kannada one of the most complex landscapes in terms of conservation challenges.
and Belgaum districts. About 60-70 elephants occur in the moist and dry Maintenance of habitat contiguity through existing corridors or through the
deciduous forests mainly of the Dandeli Wildlife Sanctuary. consolidation of habitat, mitigating the ill effects of human–elephant conflict,
and controlling poaching, fire and other degradation factors would help
The crestline of the Karnataka portion of the Western Ghats has an elephant in maintaining the integrity of the habitat. There has been a relocation of
population that occurs in small scattered groups in the forests of South four settlements (enclosures), out of 110 from within the Wayanad Wildlife
Kanara, Mangalore, Shimoga and Chikmagalur. The total number of elephants Sanctuary, thereby providing additional undisturbed areas for wildlife. The
is believed to be about 60. Wildlife Trust of India, ANCF, Elephant Family, IUCN Netherlands and World
18 19
Land Trust initiative of securing land in the Thirunelli-Kudrakote Corridor in

North Wayanad has also helped the free movement of elephants.
The Nilambur-Silent Valley-Coimbatore elephant population is connected

to the Nilgiris through the high altitude mountainous portions of Silent
Valley and Mukurthi National Parks. It is also distributed within the forests
of Nilambur South and North Divisions, Mannarkad Division and Silent
Valley National Park. The vegetation types include tropical wet evergreen,
semi evergreen, moist deciduous, dry deciduous, dry thorn scrub and shola
forests and grasslands. Though a large stretch of virgin forest is found in the
area, a portion is subjected to forestry operations, cash crop cultivation and
pressures from human habitations. There are a few constrictions through
which the elephants move either throughout the year or in certain seasons.
Maintenance of these corridors through appropriate measures, relocation of
selected private holdings and stringent protection measures can ensure the
long-term survival of this otherwise viable population.
The Anamalais-Parambikulam elephant population is one of the best

conserved with about 4500 sq km of diverse habitat and about 1600 elephants
(Easa et al., 1990). The elephants in this population range across Tamil Nadu
and Kerala. The Indira Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary and the Palani Hills form the
Tamil Nadu part of the habitat. Parambikulam, Chinnar, Thattekad, Peechi and
Chimmoni Wildlife Sanctuaries, Eravikulam National Park and the forests of
Chalakudy, Nemmara, Vazhachal, Malayattur, Munnar and Mankulam Forest
Divisions form the Kerala part of the habitat. Vegetation types range from dry
thorn scrub forest to high altitude shola grasslands with evergreen and moist
deciduous forests dominating equally.
Though vast and varied in habitat, the area also has probably the largest
number of reservoirs for irrigation and electricity generation, tea and
cardamom estates, and forest plantations, and the rampant extraction of
forest produce (especially reeds). The population is also under pressure
because of poaching. Encroachments, especially in the Mathikettan shola
Fig. 1.03: A wild tusker in Similipal Tiger Reserve, Odisha
20 21
areas, have reduced the effective habitat, depriving the elephants of some of THE CONSERVATION OF ELEPHANTS IN THE COUNTRY
their traditional movement paths. While elephants in India may seem to be protected in Elephant Reserves,
over 40% of Elephant Reserves are not part of Protected Areas or
Human-elephant conflict in this region is largely concentrated around government forests and there are ever-increasing pressures on their
the Valparai areas. The maintenance of the traditional paths through the habitat. There should be management plans for Elephant Reserves
elephant corridors, resettlement of some of the human habitations for irrespective of state or administrative boundaries. Conservation efforts
consolidation of elephant habitat, improvement of degraded habitat, and should be focused mostly on consolidating habitat, especially by reducing
effective monitoring to prevent poaching are the most crucial measures or removing biotic pressure through site-specific programmes.
for the long-term conservation of this population.
The central Indian elephant population is perhaps the most fragmented
The Periyar-Srivilliputhur population is spread over Kerala and a small portion one, with the region’s habitat further threatened due to mining activities and
of Tamil Nadu. Periyar Tiger Reserve with the adjoining Ranni, Konni, Achankovil, linear development. However, some of the sub-populations, especially in the
Punalur and parts of Thenmala Forest Divisions, form the elephant habitats in north-east, are also highly vulnerable. The skewed sex ratio due to selective
Kerala whereas Srivilliputhur and parts of Theni Divisions of Tamil Nadu form removal of tuskers, human-elephant conflict leading to intolerance among
the habitat in Tamil Nadu. The uniqueness of this area is in its vast stretch of the affected people, and policies for economic development in elephant
evergreen forests. The dry deciduous forest along the foothills of the Varashunad habitats are also of great concern. It is also important that the suggestions
Hills is also prominent. There are extensive plantations of tea and eucalyptus put forward by the Government of India appointed Elephant Task Force in
especially in the southern part. There are about 1500 elephants in the area. their report Gajah (Rangarajan et al., 2010) be implemented. An integrated
approach involving all stakeholders could probably ensure the long-term
This is probably one of the compact elephant habitats in the south, without conservation of this magnificent animal.
many human habitations. Though large-scale poaching of elephants has
resulted in the killing of a number of tuskers, one of the major issues in the
area is the disturbance caused by the Sabarimala pilgrimage, which attracts
millions of people within a short period. Stringent anti-poaching activities,
measures to improve the degraded habitats, and a reduction of the pressure
exerted on the area by pilgrims are conservation priorities.
The Agasthyamalai elephant population is the southernmost in the country

and ranges over the Kalakked-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, Kanyakumari
Wildlife Sanctuary, the Neyyar, Peppara and Shendurney Wildlife
Sanctuaries, and Reserve Forests of Thiruvananthapuram Forest Division.
A part of the Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve, this habitat supports about
300 elephants.
22 23
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
02 In ecological literature corridors are one of the three landscape elements,

the other two being ‘patch’ and ‘matrix’ (Forman and Godron, 1986). The
WHAT IS AN ASIAN principles of landscape ecology have defined corridors as narrow strips of
ELEPHANT CORRIDOR? land which differ from the matrix on either side. Corridors may be isolated
strips but are usually attached to a patch of somewhat similar vegetation
Arun Venkataraman, Sandeep Kr Tiwari and
(Forman and Godron, 1986). This definition characterises corridors in terms
K Ramkumar of their shape and spatial context but does not discuss its functional role.
Forman and Godron (1986) also emphasise the possible transport function
of corridors, arising as a consequence of their shape and context, rather than
as a necessary condition to ascribe the term “corridor” to a linear element.
THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF HABITAT FRAGMENTATION
threaten many species today and strategies to reduce their impact have Even with the above definitions the necessary criteria for determining
been widely discussed (Saunders et al., 1991; Huxel and Hastings, 1999). A whether a linear landscape element is a corridor or not is ambiguous.
proposed method for moderating the negative effects of habitat isolation One definition emphasises function (passageway from one location to
is the preservation and restoration of linear landscape elements (corridors another) while others discuss form and context (narrow and contrasting
that structurally link otherwise isolated habitat remnants) (Saunders and with the environment on its edges). Thus, when the significance of
Hobbs, 1991). These corridors are meant to increase landscape connectivity corridors to maintenance of biological diversity is debated (Noss,1987;
by facilitating movement of organisms between habitat fragments and Simberloff and Cox, 1987; Saunders and Hobbs, 1991a) disagreements
thus minimise the risk of inbreeding and extinction, increase local and arise due to divergent interpretations of the corridor concept.
regional population persistence and facilitate colonisation (Doak and
Mills, 1994; Fahrig and Merriam, 1994; Sjorgen, 1991; Simberloff, 1988). Corridors have also been described as linear patches of natural vegetation
providing habitat for species that are not adapted to the surrounding
In common usage, a corridor has been defined as: habitat, as temporary use areas or as a permanent part of their home
ranges. Maelfait and De Keer (1990), in a study of invertebrates in Belgium,
1. A gallery or passageway into which compartments or doors open recognised their use for migration but emphasised the role corridors
2. A gallery or passageway connecting several apartments of a building played as habitat. While summarising the role of corridors, Saunders and
3. A narrow passageway or route Hobbs (1991) included both the habitat (form) and movement (function)
(Merriam Webster and Co, 1961) role of linear patches. Emphasis was however placed on facilitated
movement. Merriam (1991) stated: “Corridors may or may not be involved
A common attribute of these definitions, and most relevant to their in achieving connectivity among patches or fragments”, thus implying that
ecological applications, are the terms “passageway” and “connecting”. a definition does not require a functional role of facilitating movement.
The term “passageway” or “gallery” connotes the concept that Laan and Verbbo (1990), were among few to recognise that a strip of
the corridor is narrow relative to the habitats being connected. vegetation as habitat or as a facilitator of movement are not necessarily
24 25
equivalent and are difficult to differentiate. A failure in reconciling These approaches reduce the need for some of the subjective comparisons
these definitions of corridors has led to a controversy over their value. found in the next sections. However all these approaches require
competence with the use of GIS algorithms and while invaluable for assessing
The most commonly assumed distinguishing characteristic of a corridor is landscape connectivity within a small set of landscapes, require a major
its function as a linear landscape element to facilitate species movement. national programme to assess the large numbers of corridors found in this
Soule and Gilpin (1991) provided a clear and concise definition: “a linear two volume. This is certainly possible in the future, especially if these approaches
dimensional landscape element that connects two or more patches of gain popularity within landscapes and landscape level assessments can
wildlife (animal) habitat that have been connected in historic times; it is meant eventually be complied to provide regional or national level assessments.
as a conduit for animals”. Rosenberg et al. (1995) went many steps further
in clearing the confusion over function and mathematically defined corridors. RELEVANCE OF THE ABOVE DEFINITIONS TO ELEPHANT CORRIDORS
They first defined habitat as “a patch that provides for survivorship, natality While considering the relevance of the above definitions for elephant
(birthrate) and movement. If average survivorship and natality rates allow corridors it is obvious that the management implications of such definitions
for a stable or growing population that produces immigrants it is a source have to be clearly evaluated. These
patch; otherwise it is a sink that is dependent on immigrants to sustain definitions have been strongly The most commonly
its population” and corridor as “a linear landscape element that provides influenced by principles of population assumed distinguishing
for survivorship and movement but not natality (birthrate) between other and community ecology, which while
characteristic of a
habitats”. Thus not all of a species’ life-history requirements may be met in useful when defining a corridor,
corridor is its function
a corridor. They further provided a model which provided a decision-making provide little guidance on the actual
rule for discriminating among possible passages connecting habitat patches consequences of having an elephant
as a linear landscape
so that a dispersing animal could maximise its likelihood of successful corridor and the ensuing management element to facilitate
dispersal. This model allowed for a definitive definition where “a corridor is a and conservation action required for species movement.
linear landscape element where the immigration rate to the target patch its management. It is thus essential
is increased over what it would be if the linear patch was not present”. to incorporate the ‘desirability’ of an elephant corridor in its definition.
More recently, landscape resistance maps are increasingly being used to Asian elephants are long ranging species with extensive habitat and
predict population connectivity and to map areas significant in facilitating nutritional requirements. Furthermore, the population biology and genetics
animal movement. Traditional expert opinion is presently less useful of the species require fairly unhindered gene flows across populations
for developing landscape resistance maps now that new and effective to ensure long-term viability. In the fragmented, human-transformed
approaches using empirical data provide a much more reliable and robust landscapes that typify most elephant habitats in Asia today, corridors
means to map landscape resistance. There are a number of ways to predict thus ensure that nutritional, demographic and genetic needs are met.
or describe connectivity from resistance surfaces. Least-cost paths, least- In these kinds of landscapes, corridors are likely to be surrounded by
cost corridors, circuit theory, centrality analyses, and resistant kernels are all human settlements. The usage of corridors by elephants may thereby
powerful approaches suitable for different objectives (Cushing et al., 2013). lead to human-elephant conflict through a multitude of mechanisms.
26 27
The ‘desirability’ of a corridor is the result of an interplay of the positive

and negative social and ecological attributes described above and
even though a landscape element could be defined as a corridor using
population and community ecology principles, it could be rejected
on purely social grounds. These attributes could play a dual role LENGTH
of both defining and prioritising corridors for conservation action. WIDTH
WIDTH
HABITAT B
In addition to ‘desirability’ it is also useful to define the attributes that
characterise corridors. These are: HABITAT A
• Form
• Spatial Context
• Habitat Structure
• Function Fig. 2.01: Dimensions of a corridor: length and width
THE FORM OF A CORRIDOR a corridor’s periphery. A highly threatened corridor could thus be a narrow
The form of an elephant corridor pertains to its own specific strip of private forest or revenue forest where a spread of agriculture
shape and geometry and the context of the habitats it connects. could disrupt elephant movement in a short time span. A narrow corridor
with Protected Area status could be threatened through denotification
The definition “linear landscape element” is quite apt. Linear implies and consequent exploitation for agriculture, or by the expansion or
a tendency to appear as a straight line in a single dimension. increase in the intensity of human activity on its periphery. A narrow strip
While corridors could have width and thus be two dimensional, it of habitat connecting two larger habitat patches could even be a portion
is essential they be much narrower than the habitat patches they of flat land at the foothill of mountainous terrain, the latter not conducive
connect. Corridors however do not necessarily have to be straight. for elephant movement. These attributes should thus influence decisions
on the definition and prioritisation of corridors for conservation action.
How narrow should corridors be with respect to the habitat patches they
connect? It is recommended that a subjective criterion is that the corridor For management purposes it is essential that the length and width of
should be narrow enough to experience a significant risk of being severed a corridor be carefully defined. It is recommended that the width be
in a relatively short span of time. Risks could include sudden habitat loss measured perpendicular to an axis parallel to the direction required to
caused by land use changes, or denotification and consequent land use travel from one habitat patch to another (Figure 2.01). The length is the
changes; the effect of developmental activities, e.g. roads and railway lines, distance between the two patches along this axis. Demarcation of the
creating obstacles on a corridor and impeding movement; geographical corridor boundary is also very important for the management of corridors.
events such as landslides or earthquakes; and increased human activity on For demarcation, the corridor boundary typically includes the boundary
28 29
and the extremities of the corridor are minimal and not obstructed
(e.g. by water bodies, terrain), allowing for quick and easy movement.
Passages and corridors

Form 1: Standard corridor: Figure 1 indicates a typical corridor that is easy to
identify and design conservation action for. Generally this kind of corridor
HABITAT A HABITAT B will have a well-defined structure enabling connectivity, and will facilitate
CORRIDOR
DEMARCATION elephant movement between larger habitats. The land use of the corridor
will be completely natural habitat or a mosaic of natural habitats and human
dominated habitats. Also, the corridor will be mostly surrounded by human
habitation and agriculture lands. Generally the corridor and connecting
habitats will be part of the same Reserve Forests or Protected Areas.
However, if such a corridor is in proximity to other corridors or relatively
narrow passages, how does one assess its importance with respect to others?
Fig. 2.02: Demarcation of corridor boundary
of a narrow corridor along the movement axis till it terminates in the

habitats at both ends (Figure 2.02). However, the process of demarcation
of corridor boundary may slightly vary to the various forms of corridor.
(All lighter grey areas in this figure and subsequent ones are human
dominated areas and darker grey areas are elephant habitat.) PASSAGE A
SPATIAL CONTEXT OF A CORRIDOR

There are two dominant issues here:
a. Spatial context of a corridor with respect to its connectivity to the habitat
patches it connects
b. Spatial context of a corridor with respect to other passages/corridors PASSAGE B
Habitat patches connectivity

Assuming that habitat within a corridor comprises vegetation similar
to that within the habitat patches it connects, it is desirable though not
essential that the habitat in the corridor is physically contiguous with the
habitat patches. This is provided the gap between the habitat patches Fig. 2.03: Two adjacent passages between habitats
30 31
amount of time adapting to its use and in the interim period could move
through settlements causing elephant-human conflict. In summary, when
prioritising corridors for conservation action, passage B is assigned greater
importance than passage A.
HABITAT HABITAT
PATCH A PATCH B Form 3: Multiple Corridors: In another scenario, a fragmented habitat could result
in several passages (Figure 2.04). This is a complex situation where defining
corridors among these passages (depicted by arrows) requires some thought
and is important as in a country like India, a number of elephant habitats resemble
this. It may be useful to describe this kind of habitat as a “constrained habitat”.
Fig. 2.04: Multiple form passages through a fragmented passage Ideally all such passages can be called corridors and receive conservation
action to ensure that movement from habitat patch 1 to habitat 2 is
Form 2: The scenario depicted in Figure 2.03 indicates a typical corridor, passage maximised. Obviously this is impractical, as it would then require possible
B, in close proximity to a wider passage, passage A. To evaluate the relative relocation or reduction of settlement areas, which is expensive and requires
importance of A over B one could consider the following attributes of each: significant cooperation from inhabitants in terms of accepting a disruption
1. Probability of severance due to the threats described previously

2. Importance by evaluating elephant usage, considering home range fidelity
STEEP MOUNTAINS
In the above scenario, passage A is much wider than passage B and therefore
the chance of its severance is much lower. In addition, passage A could HABITAT A
comprise a portion of a Protected Area (and hypothetically passage B could
be privately owned) and therefore the risk of severance of A through the
threats mentioned above could be minimal, though a finite risk would exist
if it were denotified or subjected to a developmental activity like a road
being built through it. If passage B is not used by elephants (because of
terrain or other ecological factors) obviously it is not an elephant corridor.
HABITAT B
However, if used by even a few elephants it acquires importance as:
a) Herds or solitary elephants that use the passage traditionally will continue
to use it through its existence. Fig. 2.05: A flat land at the foothills of mountainous terrain serving as passage
b) If severed, herds could then use passage A, but would spend a fair
32 33
of lifestyle and livelihood. It is therefore important to identify the specific elephants spend considerable time in these habitats as can be seen in North
passage that facilitates the maximum movement of elephants and thereby Bengal. The intervening spaces between the patches are often plantations,
connectivity between patch 1 and 2, and define only that as a corridor. tea gardens, or agricultural lands, often left fallow due to their usage by
This is similar to the model described by Rosenberg et al. (1995). Such a elephants and other wildlife. These habitat patches are frequently found in
corridor may facilitate movement because of preferable terrain or habitat. agricultural plantations such as those for tea cultivation, and elephants use
them for shelter in the day and to raid crops at night. Corridors of this form are
Form 4. Foothill Corridor: A narrow strip of habitat along the foothills of a associated with high levels of human-elephant conflict. Management of these
steep mountain that is not conducive for elephant movement and connects corridors would involve ensuring that the intervening areas (both agricultural
two or more viable elephant habitats. lands and plantations) are largely free of human presence and agriculture.
Any voluntary cessation of activities within by community members should be
As discussed above, Form 4 corridors (Figure 2.05) are those resulting from compensated through free, prior and informed consent. Mitigation of conflict
the topography of the landscape. These could be flat lands or gentle slopes in the surrounding communities should also be facilitated, by providing
(or both) at the foothills of steep mountains that are not conducive for subsidies and the organisation of voluntary labour for the adoption of
elephant movement but connect two larger habitats. Management would mitigation methods. Principles for facilitating movement through corridors
involve preventing any development (such as roads or settlements) or in plantations are similar though companies can also further contribute by
agricultural activity from interrupting the corridor. Foothills, being close to restoring natural habitat conditions in the intervening spaces and avoiding
human settlements/agriculture lands or other land use, are associated with any development within or in close proximity (e.g. roads and labour lines).
high levels of conflict between elephants and humans. Such corridors are
prone to land use changes and fragmentation due to expansion of human
settlements or other pressures and at times force elephants to move through
higher elevations. Both protection and management strategies to mitigate
conflict have to be given high priority to facilitate the movement of elephants.
Form 5. Stepping-stone Corridor: Private lands that connect two or more

fragmented patches of elephant habitat, serving as stepping stones between
HABITAT A
viable elephant habitats. HABITAT B
Private or government-owned forest lands and fragmented forest patches FRAGMENTED FOREST PATCHES
can facilitate movement between two larger habitats (Figure 2.06). These small
patches act as stepping stones for elephants moving between the two viable
habitats. At times, these patches (stepping stone) also functions as habitat
and the land between these patches could also be considered as corridors for
management purposes if the distance between these patches are long and Fig. 2.06: Stepping-stone corridor
34 35
of degraded or fragmented elephant habitats in human

dominated landscapes or viable elephant habitats.
Figure 2.07 shows the most complex corridor in terms of management,
comprising a series of degraded or fragmented patches connecting
FRAGMENTED two large clusters of degraded/fragmented forest patches that could
HABITAT B be considered habitat. Movement across the larger cluster tends to be
relatively less constrained than within the corridor (between these clusters),
though in and around both the clusters and the corridors, conflict is very
intense. In many cases the clusters are recognised as viable elephant
habitats (e.g. elephant habitats in Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Jharkhand),
FRAGMENTED
HABITAT A so the series of habitat patches can still be considered a corridor. In this
case the length would be the linear distance elephants travel to reach
Fig. 2.07: Fragmented forest corridor either cluster of patches and the width would be the width of the widest
patch measured perpendicular to the general direction of movement.
A similar form where there are no habitat patches between the
large habitat patches and the entire corridor comprises agricultural Form 7 Community Corridor: A
lands needs the same management action; avoiding any agricultural, contiguous revenue/private/ The most complex
settlement and development within through voluntary means. community forest that is prone to corridor in terms of
fragmentation (even in the short term) management are a
Both these forms (4 and 5) of corridors are today increasingly being and connects two or more patches of
series of degraded or
intersected by linear infrastructure despite official recognition of their viable elephant habitat.
ecological status. While transmission lines may not impede movement fragmented patches
in the long-term (with appropriate mitigation of impact during This type of corridor comprises connecting two large
construction), roads and railway lines permanently impede movement contiguous forests owned by clusters of degraded/
along these corridors in the absence of prohibitively expensive mitigation. individuals or communities and fragmented forest
providing connectivity for elephants patches that could be
The linear length in Form 4 and 5 corridors is the distance travelled by between forests owned by the considered habitat.
elephants between the two habitats. The width is that of the largest patch government (Reserve Forests or
measured perpendicular to the direction of movement. These measurements Protected Areas) (Figure 2.08).
are to determine whether these are corridors in the first place (as discussed
for Form 1 corridors) and do not have any other management implications. Since jhumming (slash and burn cultivation) is one of the major
practices in the community forests in North East India, such a
Form 6. Fragmented forest corridor: One or more fragments of small forest corridor is highly prone to fragmentation even within short time
patches/private lands or both, which connect clusters periods while the RF/PA could be considered as permanent.
36 37
or even be reforested with quick growing trees like eucalyptus or acacia

(D. K. Lahiri Choudhury pers. comm.). However, this action only provides
HABITAT A cover and no food resources and is suitable only for quick movement.
RF/PA
FUNCTION OF CORRIDORS
There is little doubt that the function of corridors is to facilitate the movement
COMMUNITY FOREST HABITAT B of elephants from one habitat patch to the other. One could even add the
RF/PA
term ‘accelerated’ here and therefore define corridors has “linear landscape
elements which facilitate accelerated movement across habitat patches”.
Corridors should not be thought of as habitat, where increased

residency could promote conflict in adjoining settlements (D.K. Lahiri
Fig. 2.08: Community corridor
Choudhury, pers. comm.). Therefore restoration programmes should
not focus on habitat improvement that could encourage elephants
Mining and other development activities are other major threats. Apart from the to stay within corridors. A similar concept is within Rosenberg et al.‘s
disparity in the legal status of these corridor forests and connecting habitats, (1995) definition where corridors provide survivorship but not natality.
these forests are more or less contiguous but prone to land use changes. In
this case the length would be the linear distance elephants travel to reach
both habitats and the width would be the width of the widest connecting
habitat measured perpendicular to the general direction of movement.
HABITAT STRUCTURE IN CORRIDORS

Forman and Godron (1986) did indicate that corridors are usually connected
to patches of somewhat similar vegetation. While this is usually true as most
HABITAT A
corridors are relics of contiguity existing in historical times and therefore
have vegetation of the connected habitat patches, one could conceive
deviations. As mentioned above, habitat patches may often have cultivated FRAGMENTED FOREST PATCHES
land separating them. If these lands are sparsely populated, lie fallow, are
not obstructed by human artefacts such as houses or other structures,
and could ensure a quick passage of elephants with no resulting conflict,
Fig. 2.09: Elephant movement from viable habitat to small patches (sink)
there is no reason to not consider these corridors. Corridors could also
be sparsely covered with relic vegetation of the connected habitat patches
38 39
corridors, either due to a lack of conceptual understanding or just to

draw attention towards any movement path of elephants. For example,
elephant movement to Mysore (Karnataka), Jamshedpur (Jharkhand), or
almost reaching Howrah (West Bengal) etc in recent years. This section
thus discusses what are not elephant corridors from a spatial context.
HABITAT A
Example 1. All landscape elements that facilitate elephant movement
between larger habitats (source) and small fragmented habitat patches (sink)
are not corridors (Figure 2.09). Similarly any landscape element facilitating
elephant movement between two small fragmented forest patches are
not corridors unless they connect viable elephant habitats at both ends. In
summary, elephants cannot go from somewhere (viable habitat) to nowhere
or nowhere to nowhere.
Fig. 2.10: Elephant movement from habitat to adjacent crop land

Example 2. Elephant movement within a contiguous habitat or from
In terms of sources and sinks, it is essential to iterate that elephant corridors a habitat to fringe village/s for crop raiding cannot be considered
only connect source patches where survivorship and natality (birth rate) for corridors (Figure 2.10). At times, these elephants take refuge in tea
a stable or growing population exist. Connecting sources with sinks (which gardens/plantations or small patches of forest during the day and raid
are entirely dependent upon on immigrants to sustain their populations) crops at night. Such movement paths cannot be considered corridors.
are undesirable for elephants, unlike for a number of other species. This
is because by definition, sinks do not support viable populations and are Example 3. A small fragmented landscape in otherwise intact habitat. It may be
usually marginalised because of human settlements. Corridors promoting useful to ignore passages created by this fragmentation entirely as elephant
elephant movement into such sinks could greatly escalate conflict levels. movement is unrestricted elsewhere (Figure 2.11).
However, there could be sinks that contain habitat of good quality and
have little human presence, and which do not have viable populations for
historic reasons e.g. past hunting levels. Corridors connecting such sinks
with sources could encourage the creation of additional viable populations.
WHAT IS NOT AN ELEPHANT CORRIDOR?

Ambiguity about the definition and shape of elephant corridors persists
HABITAT A
due to a lack of clarity on the concept among various agencies/individuals.
Elephant movement paths, migratory routes, crop raiding routes etc
are at times considered elephant corridors or loosely termed elephant Fig. 2.11: A small fragmented landscape
40 41
03 THE DESTRUCTION, FRAGMENTATION AND DEGRADATION of

natural ecosystems are the primary causes of the decline in global biodiversity.
Habitat destruction leads to fragmentation; the division of habitat into smaller
Documenting and securing and more isolated fragments separated by a matrix of human-transformed
corridors: The APPROACH land cover. The loss of area and greater exposure to human land uses along
AND Process fragment edges initiate long-term changes to the structure and function of the
Sandeep Kr Tiwari remaining fragments and are detrimental to the maintenance of biodiversity
(Haddard et al., 2015). These fragmented habitats with human populations on
the fringes also increase conflict between humans and wildlife. Understanding
the consequences of habitat change and developing effective strategies
to maintain biodiversity in disturbed landscapes is a major challenge to
both scientists and land managers. For land managers, the challenge is to
design and implement land use strategies that will ensure the conservation
of natural resources in the face of competing demands for land use. This
could be done for example, by enhancing landscape connectivity by means of
corridors – the bandages for a wounded natural landscape (Soule and Gilpin,
1991). A holistic approach is required across both public and private lands to
protect and manage natural ecosystems and ensure connectivity between
the remaining wild habitats in fragmented landscape.
Wildlife habitats in India are no exception to the ubiquitous phenomenon of

fragmentation and degradation. This has adversely affected the populations
of larger herbivores like elephants, which have vast home ranges and require
large amounts of food. This has led to increased conflict between humans
and elephants, manifesting in crop-raiding, damage to property and loss of
human and elephant lives. About 400-450 humans lose their lives due to
human elephant conflict in India annually, and around 100 elephants are
killed in retaliation for the damage they cause to human life and property.
Realising that the long-term solution to habitat shrinkage, fragmentation

and increased human-elephant conflict is land use management, and that
<< A wild elephant passing

through an elephant corridor
18 43
elephant corridors are an essential element of managing landscapes, Wildlife connectivity. In order to verify all the corridors in detail, WTI’s field team
Trust of India (WTI) took up the challenge of mapping and identifying the conducted discussions with the officials of relevant state forest departments,
status of elephant corridors in 2001 through its Wild Lands programme, forest field staff, knowledgeable members of NGOs and individuals, before
which aims at creating a buffer to the existing Protected Area network of personally visiting the corridors. Details such as GPS locations, the parameters
India by identifying, prioritising, securing and/or managing privately owned of the corridor, habitations, land use status, human artefacts, threats, and
wild lands of critical importance, thereby contributing to the conservation of socio-economic details were collected based on which a conservation plan was
threatened wild species. In 2005, in collaboration with a team of researchers, prepared for each corridor. The newly identified and verified corridors were
forest officials and NGOs, WTI and ANCF identified 88 elephant corridors in marked on a 1:50,000 toposheet. Information on the functionality or usage
India and published a report titled Right of Passage: Elephant Corridors of India of corridors by elephants was collected from frontline forest department
(Menon et al., 2005). This publication systematically assessed the status of staff, secondary surveys from local villagers (present and past usage of
88 identified corridors and prioritised them for conservation interventions corridors by elephants in the region), direct surveys for usage by elephants,
and securing. The report was endorsed by Project Elephant, Ministry of and discussions with local researchers, and published literature. The team
Environment and Forests (MoEF)* and all state forest departments. In the also collected information on the
last one decade, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change extent of habitat being connected, Corridor boundaries
(MoEF&CC), state forest departments and conservation organisations ecological importance of the were delineated based on
have been working at the policy and field level to protect and secure these landscape, alternate routes available
structural connectivity,
corridors. The Elephant Task Force formed in 2010 also recognised these to elephants, quality of habitat.
corridors and strongly recommended that they should be legally protected Corridor boundaries were delineated
functional connectivity
and secured through various approaches (Rangarajan et al., 2010). based on structural connectivity, of elephants between
functional connectivity of elephants habitats, artefacts,
However, with the rising pace of development to cater to the country’s between habitats, artefacts and and land use.
increasing human population and expanding economy, there have been land use.
further changes in land use in many wildlife areas, including elephant
habitats, since the report was published in 2005. It was hence thought The information collected from the corridors in all states was compiled
pertinent to revisit and survey the existing corridors and delineate new ones into a draft report. To finalise the list of corridors, review the corridor draft
that may have emerged in the last decade, so that their current status could report prepared for each state, and refine and strengthen corridor-specific
be understood and conservation plans prepared for securing them. conservation plans, WTI, with financial support from Project Elephant,
MoEF&CC, undertook state-level consultative meetings with forest department
Based on the list of 88 corridors identified in 2005, a review of available officials, conservation organisations working on elephants, elephant experts
literature and consultations with people working on elephants in India, the and others. The draft report was shared with participants in advance. Every
tentative new corridors were once again shortlisted. The forest cover of corridor in a state was reviewed in great detail and the final list of corridors,
elephant habitats was reviewed, including terrain/contours (using Google with the conservation plan for each corridor, was prepared incorporating the
Maps and GIS mapping) to understand the current status of elephant habitat suggestions and comments proferred. In case a new corridor was suggested,
* as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) was known at the time.
44 45
the team surveyed the area and if convinced, incorporated them into the 5. Alternate Name: Other names by which the corridor is referred to.
report.
6. Forest Division: The Forest Division in which the corridor is present or the
The rationale behind the fact sheet: nearest Forest Division to the corridor.
1. Name of the Corridor: Corridors have been named based on the names 7. Connectivity: The two elephant habitats that are being connected by the
of forests (wherever possible these are the names of the Reserve Forests) corridor.
being connected. This was done to both standardise the naming process
and logically rationalise the function of the corridor, i.e. its connection of the 8. Geographical Coordinates: The corridor’s geographical location was
named forests. Since in many cases the corridor was previously referred to recorded with a Global Positioning System (GPS) reading taken at the two
by other names, an ‘alternate name’ listing is also provided to facilitate easy ends of the corridor.
retrieval of data.
9. Length and Width: Length is the distance between two habitats in the
2. Ecological Priority: In order to accord some level of priority to the corridors, direction of elephant movement. Width is the distance of separation at the
the editors have categorised them as being of High, Medium and Low two closest points. Both are measured in kilometres.
ecological priority. This is based on the regularity of elephant movement, the
population size of elephants in connecting habitats, the area of the habitats 10. Major Land use: The land use pattern within the corridor area: forest,
being connected, and the presence of alternate routes nearby. Ecological agricultural land, settlement, tea garden, plantation, river etc.
priority can be differently interpreted by different experts and this rating may
only be taken as a thumb rule. A detailed rating is given in Appendix I. 11. Major Habitations/Settlements: Gives the names of the major
settlements located within the corridor area.
3. Conservation Feasibility: Completely independent of ecological priority,
corridors were also categorised by conservation feasibility. This took into 12. Forest Type / Vegetation: The type of vegetation present within the
account factors such as the major land use of the corridor, number of corridor area using standard vegetation types (Champion and Seth, 1964).
human settlements and/or linear infrastructure elements passing through
it, encroachment, extent of area to be purchased, presence of institutions/ 13. Frequency of Usage of the Corridor by Elephants: This has been
industries, political and community will, and the on-ground feasibility of broadly divided into regular, occasional and rare. Seasonal animal movement
securing it. The conservation feasibility of a corridor could be low even that is seen every year is classified as regular and seasonal.
if it ranks high in terms of ecological priority. As with ecological priority,
conservation priority is a reflection of WTI’s views and may be interpreted 14. Human Artefacts: Lists the man-made structures present in the corridor
differently by other agencies. A complete ranking is given in Appendix II. area that impede elephant movement.
4. State: The state or states through which the corridor runs. 15. Habitat Quality: The habitat quality assessment of the corridors was
46 47
carried out to determine tree species composition, availability of elephant 20. Corridor Villages: The name of settlements within the corridor, and
food plant species, regeneration and recruitment classes of trees and ground information especially population size and dependency [fuelwood, Non-
cover variables. Random plots of 20m x 20m were laid across the corridor timber forest products (NTFP) and other resources] of people on corridor
to collect the variables such as tree species, height and girth at the breast , forest and habitat based on socio-economic survey of people living within
height (GBH) for each individual tree (GBH> 20cm). Within the plot, four sub- the corridor.
plots of 5m x 5m were laid to record ground cover variables such as grasses,
herbs, shrubs and barren ground. The number of plots varied based on size 21. Corridor Dependent Villages: The name of settlements at the corridor’s
of corridor. periphery(within 1 km), and information especially population size and
dependency (fuelwood, NTFP and other resources) of people on corridor
16. Elephant Population in and around the Corridor: The elephant forest and habitat.
population of the habitats being connected, using data collected from
census records of state forest departments and published literature. 22. Human-Elephant Conflict: Details of human-elephant conflict, especially
Elephant dung encounter survey was also carried out in the corridor area death and injury to humans due to elephants, elephant deaths due to human
to confirm elephant movement. factors, and crop depredation in the corridor or the Forest Division.
17. Forest / Land use: Provides information on a corridor’s legal status and 23. Maps: Two maps have been included for each corridor. The first is a 3D
the land use of the corridor area: map showing the location of the corridor in the landscape and the topography
of the area. The second is a land use map showing the location of the corridor
a. Legal status of the corridor: Denotes the status of the land in the corridor and its demarcation, as well as the area to be secured/protected.
area, viz. National Park, Wildlife Sanctuary, Reserve Forest, revenue land,
community forest, private forest, private land etc 24. Conservation Plan: Lists the steps that need to be taken to protect and
b. Land use of the corridor: Provides the land use pattern within the corridor secure the corridor from current and potential threats both at the policy level
area in detail and in the form of physical interventions in the corridor.
18. Other Ecological Importance: this section includes other important One of the major issues encountered in almost all the corridors is the large-
ecological aspects like important mountain ranges, tiger/elephant reserves, scale dependence of people from corridor and fringe villages for fuelwood
protected areas, Important Bird Areas (IBA) etc present in the landscape and NTFP sourced from the corridor forest and connecting habitats. Livestock
reflecting the importance of the landscape and corridor. grazing is also reported in many corridors. Hence, it is important to undertake
eco-development activities support in corridor and fringe villages to minimise
19. Threats to the Corridor: Lists all the present and potential threats to dependence on corridor forests. Energy efficient stoves/chullahs could be
the corridor that hinder elephant movement based on direct observations, provided to the villagers to minimise fuelwood extraction from forest areas. This
discussion with forest departments, local NGOs and villagers. will also help improve their health, which is adversely affected by smoke from
traditional chullahs. Such measures have been initiated in Valmiki Tiger Reserve
48 49
18
Fig. 3.01 (a): Legend used in the plot and 3D maps for individual corridors
Fig. 3.01 (b): Legend used in the location maps of the region
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
51
and Nagzira-Nawegaon corridor villages, with a 30-40% reduction in fuelwood

collection reported. Suitable eco-developmental support should also be
provided to villagers based on their skills, after providing adequate training. The
social schemes of state and central governments and tribal welfare departments
could be channelised in these villages to reduce forest resource extraction and
win the support of local communities for securing and protecting corridors.
Another hurdle encountered in many corridors is a lack of awareness among
people about the importance of the corridor, especially the correlation
between the loss of a corridor and increased human-elephant conflict in the
Fig. 3.02: A tusker in the Chilla-Motichur corridor in Uttarakhand

area. People are also unaware how they can contribute towards securing
and protecting corridors. Awareness and education programmes targeting
corridor dependent villages and especially schools located around corridors
could be organised to sensitise the locals, and in particular children, people’s
representatives and development agencies working in the region, about the
importance of these linkages, how the impact of development activities can
be minimised, and how they can contribute towards protecting corridors. It is
important that a sense of pride be created among local communities about
corridors in their area through these awareness programmes. Only then can
the corridors be secured in the long-term. As a first step, signages have been
fixed in most of the corridor identified in 2005.
It is important for a densely populated country like India to give careful

thought to the manner in which land is secured for creating wildlife passages.
There are limits to the extent to which land can be purchased or acquired by
the government or other conservation agencies for strengthening corridors.
Ideally, the complete takeover of land should be restricted to small, critical
parcels of privately-owned land through a transparent and voluntary process.
Conserving large mammals requires a landscape approach, as emphasised
by the National Wildlife Action Plan (2017-22) that has been drawn up by the
Government of India. Given the complex mosaic of protected areas, forests
under government (both forest department and revenue department)
control, private forests, and other private lands that may serve as passages
for animals within a landscape, we should explore the possibilities of reward-
based methods both for community-owned lands and privately-held lands.
53
The concept of “conservation easements” or payments for ecosystem 1. Thirunelli-Kudrakote Elephant Corridor, Kerala
services has not yet been adequately explored in the country. The idea is to The Thirunelli and Kudrakote Reserve Forests are an important conduit for
reward land owners for maintaining wildlife friendly values. At the same time, wildlife movement between the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve and the Brahmagiri
there should be legal provisions that can be applied in and around elephant Hills. The corridor connects the Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnataka
corridors in order to regulate detrimental development. with the Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary and Wayanad North Division in Kerala,
further leading on to Nagarhole National Park in Karnataka. The corridor had
Over the years, WTI has found four approaches to be relevant for securing seven villages inside it, of which four (Thirulakunnu, Valiya Emmady, Kottapady
and protecting elephant corridors in the country. These models have been and Pulliyankolly) were strategically located at points that considerably
adopted in the conservation plans. The four models include: reduced the effective width of the corridor.
1. The Public Initiative model: Creating empowered local stakeholders WTI, in collaboration with the Kerala Forest Department and the local
through the Green Corridor Champions initiative to ensure that each and communities, and with financial support from Elephant Family, IUCN
every corridor is monitored in perpetuity; engaging with communities through Netherlands and World Land Trust, secured the corridor by purchasing
public campaigns and spot interventions. about 25 acres of land and voluntarily relocating 37 families from these four
critical villages. The families were provided with land for resettlement and
2. The Government Securement Model: Focussing on policy advocacy and agriculture, new houses, water facilities and other basic amenities. ANCF
providing central and state government agencies with technical assistance secured 12 acres of land from Suldarvayal settlement. The secured land was
and ‘soft hands’ for the securing of key corridors through official schemes for
purchase and rehabilitation.
3. The Private Purchase Model: Directly purchasing land, voluntarily

rehabilitating communities, and transferring the purchased land to the state
forest department for legal protection (a successfully implemented model is
in place).
4. The Community Securement Model: Community owned lands are set

aside through easements or bilateral benefit-sharing models; working with
community based organisations (CBOs), governments and other stakeholders
to ensure community-based protection of corridors.
CASE STUDIES OF ELEPHANT CORRIDORS SECURED
A. Private Purchase Model Fig. 3.03: Thirunelli-Kudrakote Elephant Corridor, Kerala
54 55
handed over to the Kerala Forest Department and notified as part of Wayanad of Aandipalya village, which is located between the villages of Kurubaradoddi
Wildlife Sanctuary and Wayanad North Forest Division in 2015 (Sukumar et al., and Budipaduga along the Kollegal-Satyamangalam Highway. The secured
2016). With Elephant Family’s support, the corridor is being monitored for land was transferred to the Karnataka Forest Department through a formal
animal movement and the relocated families are being monitored to assess MoU and transfer deed in 2007 to incorporate it as part of the Protected
the change in their socio-economic status. Area for legal protection and maintain it as an elephant corridor. This is the
first-ever privately purchased elephant corridor in Asia.
2. Edayarhalli – Doddasampige Elephant Corridor, Karnataka
This corridor facilitates elephant movement between Kollegal Forest B. The Government Securement Model
Division and Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple (BRT) Tiger Reserve, through the
villages of Arekadavu, Kurubaradoddi and Budipaduga, further leading on 3. Kaniyanpura - Moyar Elephant Corridor, Karnataka
to Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve. The elephant range to the east of the This corridor connects the Kaniyanpura Reserve Forest and Moyar Reserve
Biligiriranga Hills has been divided by a long strip of cultivated land, extending Forest of Bandipur Tiger Reserve. The corridor is located on the inter-state
south from the town of Kollegal for a distance of 50 km to the Tibetan boundary of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Elephants from Sathyamangalam
settlement at Byloor. This strip nearly cuts off the Doddasampige Reserve Tiger Reserve move to Bandipur Tiger Reserve through a narrow forest
Forest of BRT Tiger Reserve from the Ramapuram Range of Kollegal Forest located between the villages of Kaniyanpura, Karagundi, Kaniyanpura colony
Division. In collaboration with the Karnataka Forest Department, IFAW-WTI and settlements and the deep Moyar gorge. The corridor is 3000m in length and
ANCF secured the corridor by purchasing 25.5 acres of land from 17 villagers only 50m to 250m wide.
Fig. 3.04: Edayarhalli – Doddasampige Elephant Corridor, Karnataka Fig. 3.05: Kaniyanpura - Moyar Elephant Corridor, Karnataka
56 57
This corridor was initially very narrow, about 100m at its widest point. The Elephants can cross the Simsang river only at three or four places where
Karnataka Forest Department along with Project Elephant, Government there are sandy stretches along the river; elsewhere the river is bounded by
of India (which provided the funds) secured the corridor for the free steep limestone cliffs and large boulder formations along both banks. Only a
movement of elephants with active ground support from WTI’s regional part of the corridor forest is controlled by the Forest Department; the rest is
partner, the Asian Nature Conservation Foundation (ANCF; earlier known under local tribal community management. A major hindrance for elephant
as the Asian Elephant Research and Conservation Centre or AERCC), which movement through the corridor is the village of Aretika (with 27 families),
played a pivotal role in identifying, prioritising and correctly mapping the which lies in the corridor area across the eastern side of the Simsang River
corridor. and the southern end of Siju WLS. The people of this village practice jhum or
shifting cultivation, which is a traditional practice of tribal people throughout
Meghalaya. This has resulted in the rapid depletion of natural forests.
C. Community Securement Model
WTI, with financial support from World Land Trust (WLT) and working with the
4. Siju-Rewak Elephant Corridor, Meghalaya Nokma (Village Head), villagers, Garo Hills Autonomous District Council and
This corridor is situated in Garo Hills Elephant Reserve that supports over Meghalaya Forest Department, secured the corridor by notifying the corridor
1000 elephants. It connects Siju Wildlife Sanctuary with Rewak Reserve area as two Village Reserve Forests, namely the Siju-Aretika Village Reserve
Forest, a very important linkage for elephants that helps in maintaining Forest and the Rewak-Kosigre Village Reserve Forest, spread over about
habitat continuity between Balpakram-Siju-Rewak and Nokrek National park. 250 hectares, in 2007-08. The corridor is being monitored to assess animal
The corridor is about 3.5 km long and 2 km wide (Williams & Johnsingh,1997). usage pre and post securement. Due to increased usage of the corridor
by elephants, human-elephant conflict has increased in Aretika. An electric
fence has therefore been erected around the village to prevent the entry of
animals.
GREEN CORRIDOR CHAMPIONS
Wildlife Trust of India is also working towards empowering local stakeholders

through the formation and deployment of a cadre of Green Corridor
Champions (GCCs). These community-based organisations or groups of
individuals will work as the eyes, ears and voice of corridors. GCCs will be
charged with sensitising, motivating and mobilising local communities, and
creating a sense of pride and ownership among them towards elephant
corridors. They will work to secure and monitor the status of corridors
by coordinating the actions of local self-governments, state and central
Fig. 3.06: Siju - Rewak Elephant Corridor, Meghalaya
governments, and other stakeholders. Besides monitoring corridor usage by
58 59
elephants, GCCs will monitor and tactfully dissuade any activities resulting include identified corridors under existing Protected Areas or otherwise
in land use change that may immediately or in future create a hindrance to accord them legal protection. The aim is to generate political goodwill
animal movement through a corridor. They will sensitise people and work with and support for securing and protecting corridors and to ensure that no
local governments to institutionalise the protection of the corridor. To enable new developmental projects hindering animal movement are approved
community-based organisations to function effectively as GCCs, adequate and implemented in corridor areas.
training will be imparted to GCC members to develop their capabilities and
skills to be the real champions of corridor securement. WIldlife Trust of India has already deployed two Green Corridor Champions
covering four corridors in the Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong landscape with
Strategy: To utilise the services, expertise, reach and connectivity of local Elephant Family’s support. The GCC initiative will be scaled up to cover all the
community-based organisations that will act as champions of the cause of securing identified corridors in the country.
elephant corridors, by creating a sense of pride among the local communities
towards corridors in their area, and by gaining the trust of these communities and Wildlife Trust of India has also fixed scientifically designed signboards in all
working with them and local governments to secure identified corridors. the corridors to inform people about the importance of the corridor area and
advise them to minimise their activities in these corridors. These signages
Specific roles and responsibilities will also help local planning authorities to plan developmental activities in an
• Monitoring of the corridor for potential threats and land use changes. ecologically sensitive manner and prevent land use changes in the corridor
The objective is to keep an eye on the corridor to ensure that no activity area as the stakeholders are aware of the criticality of the area. Drivers of
inimical to animal movement takes place in the corridor area. If a threat vehicles passing through these corridors can also take due precaution upon
is perceived or manifests in the corridor, it will immediately be brought seeing the signages.
to the notice of the forest department and WTI, who in turn would take
appropriate action without losing time. The GCC may also use its skills IMPAIRED CORRIDORS
and good offices with the concerned local community to dissuade it from In the last decade, the land use and land cover of India’s elephant landscapes
indulging in any change in the land use of the corridor that will adversely have changed drastically due to developmental activities, infrastructure
impact or impair the functioning of the corridor. development, the increasing human population and the need for space for
settlements and agriculture. The already fragmented habitats have further
• Monitor the corridor for animal usage to understand how the corridor
fragmented, hindering elephant movement and resulting in increased human-
is being used by elephants and other animals, and if the movement is
elephant conflict. In the absence of protection of corridors, seven corridors
seasonal or throughout the year.
have been impaired and are no longer being used by elephants. A few other
• Undertake awareness campaigns involving the community in the corridor area corridors are also on the verge of being impaired if urgent measures are not
and in fringe villages/schools, to build public support for corridor protection. taken to protect and secure them. The impaired corridors include:
• Work with local authorities and sensitise local politicians/legislators about a) Gola Rankhu and Gorai-Tanda: This corridor connects the Gola Rankhu
the importance of specific corridors. Also persuade governments to and Gorai Reserve Forest of Terai East Forest Division and the Tanda Reserve
60 61
Forest of Terai Central Forest Division in Uttarakhand. Several infrastructural loss of forest cover and encroachment in Charduar Reserve Forest (130 sq km
and developmental elements such as NH87, an Indian Oil Corporation Limited under encroachment), Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary (satellite core of Nameri
(IOCL) depot, a railway sleeper factory, an ITBP campus, the Bindukhatta National Park), and the Singri Hills, and human settlements and developmental
encroached settlement between the Haldwani-Lalkuan Highway (NH87) activities in between, elephant movement through the corridor is totally impaired.
and the Gola River, and mining near the Gola river in the last one decade
has impaired the connectivity between these habitats. Increased human- e) D’Ering – Mebo at Kongkul: This corridor in the Pasighat Forest Division
elephant conflict reported on either side of the corridor villages, viz. Kishana of Arunachal Pradesh connects D’Ering Wildlife Sanctuary with Mebo Reserve
Nawadh, Jaipur Bisha, Gangapur Kabadwal, Tejpur Negi, Bachi Neward and forest through the Sissar Riverbed. The corridor then leads to the Dibang
Haripur Bachi, indicates that elephants are still coming to both ends of the Forest Division, criss-crossing several private forests. The corridor was near
corridor but are not able to move through it. Kongul village, a new settlement of the Padam community. The corridor
has been impaired due to floods and a change in the course of the Siang
b) Lagga Bagga – Kishanpur: Elephants once used this corridor to move River, and the formation of stiff embankments in the corridor passage. The
from the Royal Sukhlaphanta National Park in Nepal through Lagga Bagga, elephants now cross the river near the villages of Mer and Gadum.
Gunhan, Tatarganj, Chandpura, Bailha, Faizulganj, Navedia, Dhakka and the
Maharajganj beat of Bhira Range to Kishanpur Wildlife Sanctuary. However, f) Saipung – Narpuh: This corridor connects the Saipung Reserve Forest with
this corridor, situated in Pilibhit Forest Division, Kishanpur Wildlife Sanctuary the Narpuh II Reserve Forest and borders the North Cachar Hills of Assam.
and South Kheri Forest Divisions, has been subjected to fragmentation and The Lynju and Sumleng Rivers drain the corridor area. This habitat supports
extreme biotic pressure due to a large human settlement and agricultural very few elephants. Elephant movement between Narpuh RF I and Narpuh
land between the Sharda River and canal (Hazara, Navediya, Maharajpur, RF II has been totally cut off due to mining, border fencing and other activities
Khirkiya, Dhakka etc). Consequently, it is now impaired. in the region. No elephant movement has been reported between Narpuh II
and Saipung in the last four to five years.
c) Dumriya – Kundaluka and Murakanjiya (Mosabani-Rakhamines): Located in
theMosabaniForestRangeofDhalbhumForestDivision,thiscorridorusedtoconnect g) Mahananda – Kolabari: This corridor in North West Bengal connects the
the Dumriya Reserve Forest with Kundaluka Protected Forest and Murakanjiya elephant population of Mahananda Wildlife sanctuary to Kolabari Reserve
Reserve Forest, thereby maintaining elephant movement from the Sarali Protected Forest, and finally with the forests of Jhapa district of Nepal. The movement to
Forest and Kanapat Reserve Forest areas of Gorumahisani (Odisha) to the Mosabani Nepal is currently cut off due to power fencing along the Mechi River by Nepalese
and Rakhamines areas of Jharkhand. The corridor has been impaired due to authorities. The elephants now go up to the Mechi River and return, which has
agriculture and other developmental activities and a total loss of forest cover in the increased human-elephant conflict on the Indian side. Although a large number
corridor area. of elephants still comes till the Kolabari Reserve Forest and Tukrajhar forest to
raid crops, there is no viable habitat available and the movement to Nepal is cut
d) Charduar - Singri Hills: This corridor used to pass through tea gardens and off due to the power fence. The fragmented corridor currently does not connect
human settlements connecting the Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary and Charduar any habitat towards Mechi and thus cannot be considered a corridor.
Reserve Forest with the Singri Hills Reserve Forest. However, due to large-scale
62 63
04
Elephant corridors of
north-western india
Sandeep Kr Tiwari, A K Singh, A J T Johnsingh,
A Christy Williams, K Ramkumar and Sumanta Kundu
18 19
THE NORTH-WESTERN ELEPHANT HABITATS that once extended TIgers have taken over the Chilla Range after Gujjars were relocated and the
from Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary in the east to the Yamuna River in the area has been notified as part of Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
west are now fragmented at many places. The steep Himalayas and the
Shivaliks bound this elephant range to the north and the fertile Terai to the The elephant habitat in the Yamuna - Ganga section comprises the Shivalik
south. Forest Division, Dehradun Forest Division and a large part of Rajaji National
Park, supporting a substantial elephant population of at least 300. However,
The increase in human populations and associated developmental activities the elephant habitats in this region are adversely affected by presence of
have fragmented and reduced the elephant habitats and impacted the Van Gujjars, development of road and railway networks, increasing human
movement of elephants, resulting in increased human-elephant conflict. As population, agriculture activities, and industrialisation in the region (Johnsingh,
a result, the elephant population (numbering approximately 2070; MoEF&CC 1992 and 2001; Johnsingh et al., 1990; Joshi et al., 2010). Four elephant corridors
2017) distributed along the foothill of the Himalayas in Uttarakhand and Uttar have been identified in this region;
Pradesh is now broken up into six sub-populations. From west to east, the the corridor between the Motichur Because of human-
populations include those between the Yamuna and Ganga Rivers, the Ganga and Gohri Ranges of Rajaji Tiger
inhabited areas and a
and Khoh Rivers, the Khoh and Gola Rivers, the Gola and Sharda Rivers, in Reserve across the Ganga is severely
threatened due to settlements both
lack of clear government
and around Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, and that of the Katerniaghat Wildlife
Sanctuary. The major breaks in this elephant range are along the Ganga on the right and left banks, and the policies in dealing
River, along the Gola River, along the Sharda canal, and between Dudhwa consequent biotic pressure. However, with the occupants,
National Park and Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary, thus severely hindering the Chilla-Motichur corridor is being communities near the
elephant movement. In several other places too, the habitat connectivity is revived with the relocation of human forest fringes have
under severe threat of breaking up. settlements (Khandgaon-III) from the steadily encroached
corridor and the construction of an
upon forest lands.
Because of human inhabited areas and a lack of clear government policies overpass for vehicles on NH 58.
in dealing with their occupants, migrant communities near forest fringes and
hills have slowly but steadily encroached upon forest areas. This has not only The elephant habitat in the Ganga - Khoh section comprises the Gohri and
fragmented the habitats but has also led to their degradation. The dependence Chilla Ranges of Rajaji Tiger Reserve, Haridwar Forest Division and Lansdowne
of fringe communities on the forests for fuel, timber and non-timber forest Forest Division of Uttarakhand, and Bijnor Forest Division of Uttar Pradesh,
produce (NTFP); livestock grazing and conversion of natural forest into supporting about 250-300 elephants. The last two decades have seen a
monoculture plantations of teak and eucalyptus; and linear infrastructure rapid expansion of human settlements adjacent to the Laldhang-Kotdwar
elements (highways, railway lines, canals) have severely degraded elephant forest route and Kotdwar. Human encroachment into forest areas has also
habitats, with invasive alien species like Lantana and Parthenium taking root. increased, what with the large Van Gujjar population and the expansion of
The impact of Van Gujjar settlements on the habitat is multifarious. Relocation agriculture and industrial activity. These factors have severely affected the
of these communities from certain parts of Rajaji Tiger Reserve and Corbett elephant distribution in this stretch. Two elephant corridors have been
Tiger Reserve has revived the health of the forests and wildlife in these areas. identified in this region.
66 67
The elephant habitat in the Khoh and Gola River section comprises part
of Lansdowne Division, Corbett Tiger Reserve, Ramnagar Forest Division,
Terai West and Terai Central Forest Divisions, and supports more than
1000 elephants. A large human population (including Gujjars); a network of
highways; the mushrooming of resorts along the Kosi River; sand and boulder
mining on the Nihal and Gola riverbeds and sand mining on the Kosi riverbed;
NTFP collection, illegal extraction of timber and grazing; and industrialisation
(especially in Terai Central and adjacent areas of Terai East) have severely
affected elephant habitat and the movement of elephants across the habitat.
The elephant movement between Terai Central and Terai East (across the
Gola River) is completely impaired due to the presence of an Indian Oil depot,
a Railway Sleeper Factory, an ITBP camp and encroachments. The landscape
Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part I

had five corridors of which one, Gola Rankhu and Gorai - Tanda has been
impaired in the last few years.
The elephant habitats in the Gola River and Sharda River comprise the Terai
East and Haldwani Forest Divisions in Uttarakhand and Pilibhit Tiger Reserve in
Uttar Pradesh. The habitat is quite fragmented and the movement of elephants
between the Khatima and Surai Ranges across the Sharda canal in Terai East
Forest Division is very limited due to the coming up of a four-lane highway
between Khatima and Tanakpur and encroachment along the Sharda canal.
The movement of elephants between Sukhlaphanta National Park through

Lagga Bagga to Pilibhit Forest Division and Kishanpur Wildlife Sanctuary has
been almost completely impaired due to fragmentation and extreme biotic
pressure on the corridor forest from large human settlements and agriculture
land between the Sharda River and canal (Hazara, Navediya, Maharajpur,
Khirkiya, Dhakka etc). Similarly, the elephant habitat in Dudhwa Tiger Reserve
was contiguous with Nepal but is severely threatened due to encroachment.
Connectivity with Dudhwa National Park and Katerniaghat Tiger Reserve has
been disrupted due to human settlements and continuous biotic pressure. One
functional corridor exists in this stretch, through which the elephant population
of Katerniaghat Tiger Reserve is connected with Royal Bardia National Park,
Nepal, and moves across the Karnali River and agricultural landscape.
68 69
70
Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part II

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part III

71
72
Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part IV

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
Fig. 4.01: Elephants in the Chilkiya - Kota corridor

73
4.01
Kansrau-Barkote
Ecological priority: High
Conservation feasibility: High
The Kansrau-Barkote corridor provides connectivity for elephant movement

between the Kansrau Range of Rajaji Tiger Reserve and the Barkote and Rishikesh
Ranges of Dehradun Forest Division. The corridor is under severe biotic pressure
3D map showing the landscape of the Kansrau- Barkote Corridor

from the surrounding villages and heavy traffic on the Dehradun-Haridwar
highway.
State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Kansrau Range of Rajaji Tiger
Reserve with Barkote Range of
Dehradun Forest Division
Length and Width 4 km and 0.9- 2.2 km
Geographical coordinates 30° 4' 27"- 30° 6' 39" N
78° 8' 49"- 78° 11' 34" E
Legal status Reserve Forest
Major land use Forest
Major habitation/settlements Nil
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous forest with
plantation of Acacia catechu, Tectona
grandis and Eucalyptus
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular
FORESTS AND ELEPHANTS

Corridor habitat status: A total of 64 tree species were recorded in the sampled
area of 0.12 ha. The major species included Acacia catechu (13%), Tectona grandis
(33%), Trewia nudiflora (9%), Ailanthus excelsa (4%) and Eucalyptus sp (2%). Other
species included Mallotus philippensis, Zizyphus mauritiana, shorea robusta etc.
The ground cover was dominated by shrubs (39.3%), grasses (27.8%) and barren
ground (23.7%).
74 75
Estimated elephant numbers in the landscape

Rajaji National Park: 309
Dehradun Forest Division: 27
(Elephant Population Estimation, Uttarakhand, 2015)
The corridor is used by bulls and small groups of 10-12 elephants.
Forest / Land use

Forest Type: Tropical dry deciduous forest with plantation of
Acacia catechu, Tectona grandis and Eucalyptus
River: Song
Road: Dehradun – Haridwar Highway (NH 72)
Other ecological importance
Map of the Kansrau- Barkote Corridor

Mountain Range: Foothills of the Himalayas
Elephant Range: North-Western Landscape
Elephant Reserve: Shivalik Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Rajaji National Park and Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Highway traffic: High traffic on NH 72 severely impacts elephant movement.
On average, 243 vehicles move through the corridor per hour. An average of 344
vehicles ply per hour between 6 am and 6 pm, with a further 142 vehicles per
hour between 6 pm and 6 am.
2. Anthropogenic pressure: Firewood collection and cattle grazing by the people

of Lal Thappar, Chandi, Chiddarwala and Sergarh villages on the fringes of the
corridor forest have degraded the quality of vegetation. Illicit felling of trees is
also reported from the corridor area.
3. High-tension power line: Two high-tension power lines pass through the corridor
forest on either side of the Jakhan River.
76 77
Corridor dependent villages: There is no village located inside the corridor. Villages
such as Lal Thappar (210 households), Chandi (120 households), Shergarh (100
households) and Chhidarwala are located on the fringes of the corridor forest.
Villagers depend on the corridor forest mostly for fuelwood and cattle grazing.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is quite high and a large number of crop

depredation cases are reported from fringe villages (Chandi and Chhidarwala).
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent
developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
2. Construction of a flyover on NH 72 in the corridor area has to be completed as

Fig. 4.02: Groundtruthing of the corridor by the WTI team
soon as possible due to heavy vehicular movement throughout the day. Until the
flyover is completed, vehicular speeds within the corridor should be regulated by
suitable physical barriers.
Fig. 4.03: Indirect evidence of elephant presence in the corridor
78 79
4.02
Motichur-Barkote & Rishikesh
Situated between Nepali Farm Junction and Chhiddarwala village along NH 72, this
corridor connects the Motichur Range of Rajaji Tiger Reserve with the Barkote and
3D map showing the landscape of the Motichur- Barkote and Rishikesh Corridor
Rishikesh Ranges of Dehradun Forest Division. It comprises the Motichur Range
of Rajaji Tiger Reserve (Suswa 5 Block) and the Barkote (Golatappar 7b Block)
and Rishikesh Ranges (Gola 6b Block) of Dehradun Forest Division. The corridor
is mostly used by bulls and movement intensifies during the cropping season.
Elephants generally cross the corridor near Tinpani nullah to move between the
habitats.
Alternate name Tinpani Corridor

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Rajaji TR and Dehradun Division
Length and Width 1.5 km and 2 km
Geographical coordinates 30° 3' 14"-30° 4' 34" N
78° 11’ 44”-78° 13’ 17” E
Major land use Forest, Settlement, River and Road
Major habitation/settlements None
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous mixed forest
and Teak plantation
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional
Corridor habitat status: An average density of 367 trees per ha was observed
in the corridor area. Tectona grandis (31.8%) and Syzygium cumini (20.5%) were
dominant species in the sampled area of 0.12 ha. A maximum GBH of 108.6 cm
80 81
was measured for Syzygium cumini. Thick undergrowth was observed in all the
sample plots due to the ongoing monsoon season, with only about 5% of the
ground being barren. The ground cover was dominated by curry leaves (Murraya
koenigii), Trewia nudiflora, Kala bansa (Barleria sp), Syzygium cumini, Cassia fistula,
Diospyros melanoxylon etc. Other species included Mallotus philippensis, Zizyphus
mauritiana, Shorea robusta etc. The ground cover was dominated by shrubs
(39.37%) followed by grasses (27.81%) and barren ground (23.75%).

Rajaji Tiger Reserve: 309
Dehradun Forest Division: 27
Map of the Motichur- Barkote and Rishikesh Corridor

(Elephant Population Estimation, Uttarakhand, 2015).
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical dry deciduous mixed forest and teak plantation
River: Song; Tinpani nullah
Road: Dehradun – Haridwar Highway (NH 72)

Mountain Range: Himalayas
Protected Area: Rajaji Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements and biotic pressure: Though the corridor has no settlements, biotic
pressure arises from the large human population of fringe villages. The people
of Sahab Nagar, Khairi Kalan and Khairi Khurd collect fuelwood and Non Timber
Forest Produce (NTFP) from the corridor forest, which has degraded its habitat.
82 83
2. Highway traffic: High traffic and the expansion of NH 72 is severely affecting 3. The boundary wall and the abandoned canteen building of Tinpani Recreational
elephant movement. On average, 243 vehicles move through the corridor per Park should be demolished to aid unhindered movement of elephants. Activities
hour, with 344 vehicles per hour moving between 6 am and 6 pm, and a further deterimental to wildlife movement within the forest should be prevented.
142 vehicles per hour between 6 pm and 6 am. The ongoing expansion of NH
72 has further hindered elephant movement due to sound pollution, increased 4. As the corridor forest runs along NH 72 for about a kilometre, speed breakers
human presence and construction material being dumped along the corridor. should be installed at both ends of this stretch to reduce vehicular speeds at
night, since the majority of elephant movement is reported after dark.
3. A high-tension electric line passes through Suswa 5 Block of the Motichur Range
and Gola 6b Block of Rishikesh Range. The sagging of this electric line could be 5. Suitable elephant proof barriers could be dug along the forest boundary of
fatal for elephants. Suswa 5 Block of the Motichur Range and Golatappar 7b Block of the Barkote
Range to reduce conflict in fringe villages. A 500-metre-long trench is already in
4. Boundary wall and canteen building in Tinpani park: The boundary wall and place along the forest boundary of the Gola 6b Block of the Rishikesh Range.
canteen building of the abandoned Tinpani Recreational Park (Golatappar 7b
Block) are major obstacles to elephant movement.
Corridor dependent villages: Khairikalan, Khairi Khurd and Sahab Nagar.
The fringe villages of Khairikalan (147 households), Khairi Khurd (293 households)
and Sahab Nagar (375 households), and the biotic pressure they exert (fuelwood
and NTFP collection) has degraded the corridor forest.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is reported from villages on the corridor

periphery. Conflict intensifies during the cropping season, mostly by the bulls.
Human-leopard conflict has increased in recent months.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Electric line pillar posts in the corridor need to be strengthened and the high-
tension line should be periodically monitored to prevent sagging. Fig. 4.04: Elephant in the Motichur-Barkote Corridor
84 85
4.03
Motichur - Gohri
Ecological priority: Medium
Conservation feasibility: Medium
This corridor connects the Motichur and Gohri Ranges of Rajaji Tiger Reserve
across the Ganga River. Elephants move along the Song River and through Raiwala
Block 2 and Suswa Block, crossing the road near the Satyanarayan Temple. Due to
3D map showing the landscape of the Motichur-Gohri Corridor

the tremendous pressure from villages as well as roads and other development
activities, elephant movement has greatly reduced through this corridor.
Alternate Name Binj-Rau

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Motichur and Gohri Ranges of Rajaji
Tiger Reserve
Length and Width 5 km & 1-0.3 km
Geographical coordinates 30° 1’ 39”-30° 3’ 19” N
78° 12’ 40”-78° 16’ 45” E
Legal status Rajaji Tiger Reserve, Revenue Land
Major land use Forest, human settlements,
agriculture land and river
Major habitation/settlements Tehri Farm, Gohri Maphi (part) and
Ganga Bhogpur
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous forest, sal
and teak plantation
Frequency of usage by elephants Rare; bulls and small herds
Corridor habitat status: A total of 67 plant species were recorded in the sampled
area of 0.2 ha. The average GBH and height recorded were 86.23 cm and
86 87
23.5 m respectively. Average tree density was 310 trees per ha. Tectona grandis
and Shorea robusta were dominant species. Other species included Mallotus
phillipinensis, Acacia catechu, Zizyphus mauritiana etc.
The ground cover was dominated by barren ground (43.1%), shrubs (28.7%) and
herbs (24.3%) with the remaining area covered by grasses.

Map of the Motichur-Gohri Corridor showing the land to be secured

Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical dry deciduous forest
Settlements: Gohri Maphi (part) and Tehri Farm. Ganga Bhogpur (on the other side
of the Ganga River), Satyanarayan Forest Rest House
Rivers: Ganga and Song
Road: Haridwar-Dehradun (NH 72)
Railway: Rishikesh-Haridwar
Buildings/Artefacts: Chilla power canal, Satyanarayan Temple

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Highway traffic: Heavy traffic on NH 72 severely affects elephant movement.
On average, 571 vehicles per hour move through the corridor. Between 6 am and
6 pm, 808 vehicles ply per hour. A further 333 vehicles ply per hour between 6
pm and 6 am. Although an overpass for vehicles was planned and work started
88 89
about three years ago, this is currently on hold. The incomplete structure and 2. Construction of a flyover on NH 72 in the corridor area has to be completed as
construction debris has severely affected elephant movement. soon as possible due to heavy vehicular movement throughout the day. Until the
flyover is completed vehicle speeds within the corridor should be regulated by
2. Railway line: (Haridwar- Rishikesh): Between 14 and 16 trains pass through the suitable physical barriers.
corridor every day, of which four trains run between 6 pm and 6 am.
3. Traffic movement between Chilla and Rishikesh has to be regulated.
3. Settlements: Tehri Farm, Gohri Maphi and Ganga Bhogpur settlements act as
physical barriers and are sources of anthropogenic pressure, hindering the free 4. Train speeds must be regulated and steps taken to prevent the dumping of
movement of elephants and other wild animals. food waste on the track in the corridor area.
4. Chilla power canal: With its cemented embankments, the Chilla power canal is a 5. Screens should be installed on both sides of the road bridge on the Song River
major hurdle to elephant movement. The small bridge on the canal is mostly used to minimise the effect of vehicle headlights.
by solitary bulls and rarely by small herds. Traffic movement between Chilla and
Rishikesh hinders elephant movement. 6. An animal friendly bridge with sufficient width has to be built on the Chilla power
canal to facilitate animal movement.
5. Satyanarayan Temple: Biotic pressure from devotees as well as the structure
itself hinders animal movement. 7. In consultation with villagers, 26 acres of land need to be secured in Tehri Farm
along the Song River.
6. Satyanarayan Forest Rest House is situated inside the corridor.
Corridor Villages: Tehri Farm (50 families), Ganga Bhogpur (201 families and a
population of 1150), and part of Gohri Maphi.
Corridor dependent villages: Gohri Maphi (part).
Human-Elephant Conflict: From 2003 to 2013 there were 2158 cases of human
injury/livestock death/crop damage/property loss due to conflict with elephants
reported in Rajaji National Park.
CONSERVATION PLAN
90 91
4.04
Chilla- Motichur
This corridor extends across the Ganga and connects the western part of Rajaji
Tiger Reserve (and thereby Dehradun Forest Division and Shivalik Forest Division)
3D map showing the landscape of the Chilla- Motichur area showing the corridor
to the eastern part, maintaining the Rajaji-Corbett elephant population as a single
entity. Elephants mostly move through Motichur rau, the former Khandgaon-III
village, and areas adjacent to the army ammunition dump to move between the
habitats.
State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Motichur Range with Chilla Range of
Rajaji Tiger Reserve
Length and Width 4 km and 1 km
78° 11’ 16”-78° 14’ 46” E
Legal status Revenue Land, Reserve Forest and
Tiger Reserve
Major land use Forest, agriculture, human settle-
ments, road, railway line, river and
power canal
Major habitation/settlements Nil; (Khandgaon-III relocated to
Lalpani)
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous sal forest
and teak plantation
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; throughout the year
area of 0.4 ha. Average GBH and height were 68.23 cm and 22.5 m respectively.
92 93
Average tree density was 210 trees per ha. Tectona grandis was dominant and
also extensively debarked by elephants in this corridor. Other species included
Mallotus philippensis, Shorea robusta, Adina cordifolia, Ehretia laevis, Aegle marmelos,
Holarrhena antidysenterica, Trewia nudiflora, Lagerstroemia parviflora, Mitragyna
parviflora, Terminalia tomentosa etc.
The ground cover was found to be dominated by shrubs (45.6%), herbs (30%) and
grasses (11.2%). The remaining area was barren ground.
Map of the Chilla – Motichur Corridor showing artefacts and Khand Gaon-III village
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical dry deciduous sal forest and teak plantation
Settlements: Khandgaon-III (relocated to Lalpani, Rishikesh)
Rivers: Ganga, Motichur rau
Road: Haridwar-Dehradun (NH 72)
Railway: Haridwar-Dehradun
Artefacts: Army ammunition dump, Chilla power Canal

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Anthropogenic pressure (fuelwood collection and grazing) from
fringe villages (Khandgaon-II and III and Haripurkalan) impacted the corridor
forest. Khandgaon-III has now been relocated to Lalpani, Rishikesh.
94 95
2. Highway traffic: Heavy traffic on NH 72 severely affects elephant movement. CONSERVATION PLAN
Between 6 am and 6 pm, 808 vehicles move through the corridor per hour on
average. A further 333 vehicles ply per hour between 6 pm and 6 am. Although an 1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
overpass for vehicles was planned and work started about three years ago, this is department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent
currently on hold. The incomplete structure and construction debris has severely developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
affected elephant movement.
2. Rehabilitation of Khandgaon-III: villagers that resided within the corridor have
3. Railway line (Haridwar- Dehradun): Over 60 trains pass through the corridor every been relocated to Lalpani Block II of the Rishikesh Range.
day, with an average of 2.5 trains per hour. Train-hits on this line have resulted in
the death of 22 elephants since 1987. 3. Construction of a flyover on NH 72 in the corridor area has to be completed as
soon as possible due to heavy vehicular movement throughout the day.
4. Chilla power canal: With its cemented embankments, the Chilla power canal is a
major hurdle to elephant movement. The small bridge on the canal is mostly used 4. Train speeds need to be regulated and an Animal Detection System installed
by solitary bulls and at times by small herds. Traffic movement between Chilla and along the tracks. Dumping of food waste on tracks in the corridor must be
Rishikesh hinders elephant movement. prevented. Until the Animal Detection system is in place, night patrolling of
critical sections of the track by Wildlife Trust of India, Northern Railways and the
5. Army ammunition dump: The concrete boundary of this area hinders elephant Uttarakhand Forest Department should continue.
movement. Sound pollution from nearby firing range also affects elephant
movement. 5. The army ammunition dump should be shifted to alternate site outside the
corridor.
Corridor villages: The Khandgaon-III settlement was situated inside the corridor
and had 31 households with a population of about 130-140. To secure the corridor, 6. Animal friendly bridges have to be created on the Chilla power canal, with
the families have been rehabilitated to alternate site at Lalpani, Rishikesh. sufficient width to facilitate animal movement. The movement of vehicles between
Chilla and Rishikesh needs to be regulated, especially in the mornings and
Corridor dependent villages: Khandgaon-II (35 families), part of Khandgaon-III (15- evenings.
16 families) and Haripurkalan (75-80 families)
7. Habitat restoration of the degraded corridor forest in the land vacated by
Human-Elephant Conflict: Three human deaths (one adult female and two Khandgaon-III residents needs to be undertaken.
children) were reported in the corridor area due to a tusker attack on November
5, 2010.
The incidence of human-elephant conflict in and around Rajaji National Park is

quite high. About 12 human deaths, 23 cases of human injury and more than
1900 cases of crop depredation were reported between 2003-04 and 2013-14.
96 97
4.05
Rawasan-Sonanadi
(Via Lansdowne FD)
3D map showing the landscape of the Rawasan-Sonanadi (via Lansdowne FD) corridor
This corridor connects Rajaji and Corbett Tiger Reserves. Elephants use the
foothills between Rawasan (at the eastern end of Rajaji Tiger Reserve) and the
Khoh River (western end of Corbett Tiger Reserve) and pass through the Rawasan,
Sigaddi, Malan, Gawalgarh, Sukhrao, Giwain and Totgadhera blocks in the hilly
terrain of Lansdowne Forest Division.
Alternate Name Rajaji-Corbett

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Rajaji Tiger Reserve and Corbett
Tiger Reserve
Length and Width 21 km and 1–2 km
78° 22’ 46”-78° 33’ 27” E
Legal status Reserve Forest & Revenue Land
Major land use Forest, settlements and agriculture
Major habitation/settlements Various Gujjar deras (settlements)
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular, both bulls and herds use
this corridor
Corridor habitat status: This is a sal (Shorea robusta) dominated mixed forest. Other
species include Anogeissus latifolia, Desmodium oojeinense, Bauhina roxburghiana,
Syzygium cumini, Terminalia alata, Butea monosperma, Mallotus philippensis, Cassia
fistula etc. The main shrubs found are Zizyphus mauritiana and Helicteres isora.
98 99

Lansdowne Division: 160
Corbett Tiger Reserve: 1035
(Source: Elephant Population Estimation, Uttarakhand, 2015)
Elephant movement is regular and both bulls and family herds use the corridor,
although in small groups of 5-10.
Forest/Land use
Forest: Tropical dry deciduous sal forest
Settlements: A large number of Gujjar settlements (deras)
Map of Rawsan-Sonanadi (via Lansdowne) corridor

River: Sonanadi
Road: Lansdowne to Pauri (NH 119)

Protected Areas: Sonanadi Wildlife Sanctuary, Rajaji Tiger Reserve
and Corbett Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements and anthropogenic pressure: A large number of settlements are
located all along the corridor. People in these setllements depend on the corridor
forest for fuelwood and grazing their livestock.
The corridor has a large number of settlements towards its southern part and the
biotic pressure from these villages (again mainly fuelwood extraction and cattle
grazing) is a major threat to the corridor.
2. Heavy traffic on NH 119 (Lansdowne to Pauri) threatens elephant movement
100 101
between the habitats. Pauri being the district headquarters, Kotdwar a major 3. Settlements from the Laldhang and Kotdwar Ranges within the corridor could
business destination and Lansdowne the headquarters of the Garhwal Rifles be relocated near the southern periphery of the Chiriyapur Range of Haridwar
regiment, traffic volume is a major issue. On average, 243 vehicles move through Forest Division in consultation with the residents, many of whom have expressed
the corridor per hour, with 344 vehicles per hour between 6 am and 6 pm, and a their willingness to relocate.
further 142 vehicles per hour between 6 pm and 6 am.
4. Vehicular traffic needs to be regulated at night through suitable barriers. A
3. Encroachment in the Malan River area near Karalghati, Laldhang and Kotdwar flyover could also be constructed between Lal Pul and Aamsaur.
areas is another problem.
Corridor dependent villages: Jhandi Chaur, Ram Dayalpur, Laldhang, Chamaria,

Nayagaon, Bhubdevpur, Mandevpur, Kishandevpur, Shrirampur, Jaidevpur,
Dalipur, Ramdayalpur, Lokmanipur, Udairampur, Teliwara, Bhimsinghpur, Kothala,
Mawakot, Satichaur, Dhrubpur, Lalpur, Shivpur, Kotdwar, Gewai, Grastanganj,
Ratanpur, Khumichaur, Bisanpur, Nathupur, Aamsaur, Jamargaddi, Ramripulinda,
Aldawa etc.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Human-elephant conflict is high in this region. From

2007 to 2012, a total of 76 cases of human injury/death were reported in
Lansdowne Forest Division. During the same period, 344 cases of crop damage
by elephants were reported. High levels of conflict with leopards and tigers are
also reported in and around the corridor area. Between 2008 and 2010, 23 cattle
were lost to tigers and 241 livestock predated by leopards, with most incidents
reported from the Laldhang Range (Malviya and Ramesh, 2015).
CONSERVATION PLAN
developmental activities affecting elephant movement. Fig. 4.05: A signage in the corridor for public awareness
2. Demarcation of the forest boundary on southern side of the corridor could be

carried out. Power fences could also be provided in fringe villages in the southern
part of the corridor to mitigate conflict.
102 103
4.06
Rawasan-Sonanadi
(Via Bijnor Forest Division)
3D map showing the landscape of the Rawasan-Sonanadi (Via Bijnor FD) corridor
This corridor, which extends between the Khoh River (Sonanadi Wildlife Sanctuary
west of Corbett Tiger Reserve) and the eastern end of Rajaji Tiger Reserve
(Rawasan), passes through Bijnor Forest Division in Uttar Pradesh and is extremely
degraded due to agriculture and the influx of people from the hill areas. Moving
from Corbett Tiger Reserve (Sonanadi Reserve Forest), elephants pass through
the Saneh Reserve Forest (Compartment 2) and cross the Khoh River to enter
the Kauria Range of Bijnor Forest Division between Deven Nagar and Shankerpur
Farm.
Alternate Name Rajaji-Corbett

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Rajaji National Park and Corbett
Tiger Reserve
Length and Width 28 Km and 0.1-11 km
78° 19’ 31”-78° 31’ 38” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Patta Land
Major land use Forest, settlements and agricultural
land
Major habitation/settlements Gujjar Basti, Devennagar,
Shankerpur, Chatruwala
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional (solitary and herds)
104 105
Corridor habitat status: This is a sal (Shorea robusta) dominated mixed forest. Other
species include Anogeissus latifolia, Desmodium oojeinense, Bauhina roxburghiana,
Syzygium cumini, Terminalia alata, Butea monosperma, Mallotus philippensis, Cassia
fistula etc. The main shrubs found were Zizyphus mauritiana and Helicteres isora.

Lansdowne Division: 160
Rajaji Tiger Reserve: 309
Map of Rawsan-Sonanadi (via Bijnor FD) corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous forest
Settlements: Gujjar deras, Deven Nagar, Shankerpur Farm and Chatruwala
Road: Najibabad-Kotdwar (NH 119), Kotdwar-Kalagarh–Kotdwar
Railway: Najibabad-Kotdwar Railway Line

Protected Areas: Sonanadi Wildlife Sanctuary, Corbett Tiger Reserve and
Rajaji Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human settlements and anthropogenic pressure: Gujjar settlements within the
corridor as well at its periphery, especially Jaspurchamaria and Laldhang villages,
exert biotic pressure (fuelwood extraction, cattle grazing) on the corridor forest.
Boulder mining is also an issue in the area.
106 107
2. Highway Traffic: High traffic in the Najibabad-Kotdwar stretch of NH 119 severely 4. A parcel of 127 acres of land in the Shankurpur Farm area and 61 acres of land
affects elephant movement. On average, 404 vehicles move through the corridor in Sulema Shikopur could be secured to facilitate elephant movement.
per hour. Between 6 am and 6 pm, 281 vehicles pass through the corridor per
hour. Another 122 vehicles pass through the corridor per hour between 6 pm 5. The expansion of Chatruwala village and other fringe settlements within the
and 6 am. corridor forest needs to be prevented, as does the spread of agricultural activities.
3. Proposed conversion of the Kotdwar-Laldhang forest road into a metalled road. 6. The forest boundary on both sides of the corridor, especially the southern side,
should be demarcated.
4. Najibabad-Kotdwar Railway Track: This railway track passes through the corridor
and is a threat to elephants crossing from Zafrabad (mainly from Compartments
3, 2B, 2A and 9) in the Kauriya Range.
5. Shankerpur Farm: This farm is situated in the corridor near the Khoh River and
is a barrier to elephant movement.
Corridor Villages: Gujjar Basti, Devennagar, Shankerpur, Chatruwala.
Corridor dependent villages: Motadhak, Medduwala, Sherawala, Ramnagar,

Rahman Nagar, Prem Nagar, Hardaspur, Laldhang, Jashpur Chamaria, Hardaspur,
Bhawanipur and Kawriria.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Traffic on Nazibabad-Kotdwar road (NH 119) passing through the corridor Fig. 4.06: Elephant sighting in the Rawasan - Sonanadi Corridor
needs to be regulated, especially at night.
3. Train speeds need to be regulated between 6 pm and 6 am.
108 109
4.07
Malani-Kota
This is one of the three corridors that connect Corbett Tiger Reserve with Ramnagar
Division. The corridor is situated between the Aamdanda gate of Corbett TR and
Laduachaur (Dhikuli) village along NH 121. Ringora village is situated in the middle
of the corridor. Elephants mainly pass through the Majar and Ringora nullahs to
3D map showing the landscape of the Malani- Kota Corridor

move between the habitats.
Alternate Name Ringora- Bijrani

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Corbett Tiger Reserve and
Ramnagar Division
Length and Width 1 km and 2.8-3.5 km
79° 7’ 18”-79° 9’ 4” E
Major land use Forest, Settlement, River and Road
Major habitation/settlements Ringora
and teak plantation
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; used by bulls and herds
Corridor Habitat Status: Tree density was estimated at 408 per ha in the corridor
area. Dominant tree species in the sampled area of 0.12 ha were teak (Tectona
grandis: 65.3%) followed by rohini (Mallotus philippensis: 24.5 %). The highest GBH
was found in Tectona grandis (200 cm).
110 111
At least 60% barren ground was observed in the sample plots due to the presence
of teak plantations. Curry leaves (Murraya koenigii), Kala bansa (Barleria sp), Shorea
robusta, Mallotus philippensis etc were dominant in the remaining ground cover.
Estimated elephant numbers in the landscape:

Ramnagar Forest Division: 84
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous sal forest and teak plantation
Settlements: Ringora Khatta and roadside shops
River: Kosi
Road: NH 121
Map of the Malani- Kota Corridor

Other ecological importance:
Protected Area: Corbett Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlement: Ringora village located within the corridor hinders elephant
movement.
2. Fuelwood collection: Extraction of fuelwood from the corridor for personal and
commercial use by people in and around Ramnagar town has affected the quality
of the habitat.
3. Sand/boulder mining: Illegal boulder and sand mining is persistent in the Kosi
riverbed near Ringora village, hindering animal movement.
112 113
4. Resorts: A large number of resorts in Dhikuli have increased traffic flow through encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
the corridor, with tourists at times stopping by the road when animals are sighted.
2. Commercial activity inside Ringora village and along the portion of NH 121
5. Vehicular traffic: There is heavy traffic on NH 121 which runs through the corridor within and around the corridor should be strictly prohibited.
due to the aforementioned resorts and hotels in Dhikuli. On an average 128
vehicles were recorded moving through the corridor per hour. This number went 3. In consultation with the villagers, Ringora village should be relocated to an
up to 212 vehicles per hour between 6 am and 6 pm, with a further 45 vehicles alternate site.
per hour moving through the corridor between 6 pm and 6 am.
4. Sand/boulder mining in the Kosi riverbed, whether for personal or commercial
6. Forest fires: Man-made forest fires are another major problem in the corridor, purposes, should be strictly prohibited in the corridor area.
affecting vegetation and the herbivore population.
5. Electric posts in the corridor must be strengthened and the high-tension line
7. A high-tension electric line passes through Compartment 1 and is a threat to periodically monitored to prevent sagging.
elephants since the wires sag in places. One elephant was electrocuted and died
when it came in contact with a sagging line recently. 6. The speed of vehicles passing through the corridor area should be regulated
through speed breakers.
Corridor villages: Located within the corridor, Ringora village has about 35 to 38
families. Most of the inhabitants are engaged in various professions in Ramnagar
and Dhikuli. A few villagers have small shops / dhabas in the village area on Land identified to secure the corridor: Ringora village is located in middle of
NH 121. Some families are also dependent on agriculture, which is mostly the corridor and covers an area of about 20 ha. This land was given to these
monsoon based. This village does not have basic facilities like electricity, water families by the forest department during the colonial period. The land presently
supply and healthcare. falls under the Reserve Forest category. As the corridor is vital for the movement
of both elephants and tigers, the village should be relocated preferably close to
Corridor dependent villages: Aamdanda (70-80) families and Teda (200-225 Ramnagar town, as most of the inhabitants are dependent on Ramnagar for their
families) day-to-day work.
Human–Elephant Conflict: There is hardly any conflict reported to the forest

department. However, interactions with villagers reveal that there is occasional
crop-raiding by lone bulls and small herds.
CONSERVATION PLAN
114 115
4.08
Chilkiya – Kota
Among the three corridors connecting Corbett Tiger Reserve with Ramnagar
Division, this one is the most crucual. The corridor is situated along the Kosi River
and NH 121, between Garjiya Temple and the Dhangarhi gate of Corbett Tiger
Reserve. Elephants move through Sunderkhal village (Kosi Range), which is situated
3D Map showing the landscape of the Chilkiya - Kota Corridor

in the middle of the corridor on encroached forest land along the main road.
Alternate Name Dhangari-Sunderkhal

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Chilkiya Reserve Forest of Corbett
Tiger Reserve and Kota RF of
Ramnagar Division
Length and Width Length 0.7 km and width 3.9 km
79° 5’ 58”-79° 8’ 37” E
Major land use Forest, Settlement, River
Major habitation/settlements Sunderkhal (Panod, Sunderkhal,
Devichaur and Garjia)
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous (sal
dominant), teak plantation, riverine
Corridor Habitat Status: An average density of 360 trees per ha was observed in
the forested part of the corridor. Sal (Shorea robusta; 30.6%), teak (Tectona grandis;
40.3%) and khair (Accacia sp; 20.8 %) were the dominant species in the sampled
116 117
area of 0.2 ha. Maximum GBH was measured for Pilkhan (Ficus sp; 280 cm). The
bark of Tectona grandis and Shorea robusta, and the leaves and bark of Mallotus
philippensis are palatable to elephants.
About 10% of the sampled area was barren. The ground cover was dominated
by curry leaves (Murraya koenigii), kala bansa (Ver), Shorea robusta, Mallotus
philippensis etc. The area of the corridor between the road and the river is mostly
occupied by humans.
Map of the Chilkiya- Kota corridor showing the village to be relocated

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous (sal dominant), teak plantation, riverine
Settlements: Sunderkhal (encroachment)
River: Kosi River
Buildings/Artefacts: Garjiya Temple, shops on riverbed near the temple
Roadway: NH 121, Ramnagar–Ranikhet road

Mountain Ranges: Himalayas
Elephant Range: North-Western landscape

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlement: Sunderkhal village, an encroachment, occupies about 92 ha of the
corridor area and has considerably reduced the width of the corridor, affecting
animal movement.
118 119
2. Biotic pressures: Cattle grazing and fodder and fuelwood collection by villagers Human–Elephant Conflict: No human causalities have been recorded due to
has degraded the corridor habitat quality. elephants in this area, but there have been cases of human death and injury due
to tigers within the corridor area and surrounding habitats over the last six years.
3. NTFP collection: Large numbers of people frequent the corridor to collect NTFP, A total of eight tiger-related human deaths and three leopard-related deaths were
especially curry leaves (Murraya koenigii). This has increased conflict between reported between November 2010 and September 2016. Cattle depredation is
humans and elephants as well as tigers. also a problem in the region.
4. Garjiya Temple: The mass gathering of pilgrims at this temple, as well as

associated developmental activities such as the construction of hotels and shops CONSERVATION PLAN
near the riverbank within the corridor hinders elephant movement throughout
this area. 1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
5. High-tension electric Line: A high-tension line passes through the Kosi Range in encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
the corridor, posing a threat to elephants.
2. All 310 families of Sunderkhal village (consisting of Panod, Sunderkhal, Devichaur
6. Traffic: NH 121, which runs through the corridor, is a busy road due to the and Garjia) have to be relocated to an alternate site. A majority of families are
presence of numerous hotels, resorts and other tourist spots. On an average agreeable to relocation provided a suitable compensation package is provided.
117 vehicles were recorded passing through the corridor road per hour, with an
average of 72 vehicles per hour between 6am and 6 pm, and 26 vehicles per hour 3. All new developmental activities inside Sunderkhal village and in fringe areas
between 6pm and 6 am. of the corridor should be prohibited. Shops located on the riverbed near Garjiya
Temple should be removed.
Corridor Villages: Sunderkhal with its 310 families has a population of about 1500
and is an encroached village. Most of these families belong to the Scheduled 4. Cattle grazing and collection of fodder and fuelwood should be regulated inside
Caste category. They have migrated from the hilly regions of Nainital, Almora the corridor area. Illicit felling of trees should be completely stopped.
and Garwhal and have been settling in the area since 1974. People here mostly
depend on the nearby resorts, hotels and factories for their livelihood, or work 5. Commercial exploitation of NTFP, especially curry leaves, sourced from the
as labourers in the unorganised sector. Agricultural activity in Sunderkhal has corridor area should be banned.
drastically reduced over the last few years due to crop-raiding by wild animals,
especially elephants, and the erosion of land due to floods in the Kosi River. 6. Electric posts in the corridor should be strengthened and electric lines
periodically monitored to prevent sagging or damage during floods.
Corridor dependent village: Chafulla khatta is a small hamlet of six families.
The land was allotted to these families by the forest department during the Land identified to secure the corridor: About 92 hectares in the Panod,
colonial period. Sunderkhal, Kanojia and Devichaur segments of the corridor should be secured
on a priority basis.
120 121
4.09
South Patlidun – Chilkiya
This corridor is located in the Mohan Range of Almora Forest Division, which
connects Corbett Tiger Reserve (Mandal Range) with Ramnagar Forest Division
3D map showing the landscape of the South Patlidun – Chilkiya Corridor area
(Kosi Range). This is one of the three corridors connecting Corbett Tiger Reserve
with Ramnagar Division. Elephants move between the villages of Mohan and
Kumeria, mostly along the nullahs on both sides of the Kosi River.
Alternate Name Mohan - Kumeria

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity South Patlidun RF of Corbett
Tiger Reserve and Chilkiya RF of
Ramnagar Division
Length and Width Length 3.5-5.0 km and width
0.5-2.0 km
79° 6’ 35”-79° 9’ 18” E
Major land use Forest, settlement, industry,
agriculture, resorts
Major habitation/settlements Mohan Industrial Area
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous (sal
dominated) and teak plantation
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular, mostly used by bulls

Corridor Habitat Status: An average of 500 trees per ha was observed in the
corridor area. Sal (Shorea robusta; 28.3%), rohini (Mallotus philippensis; 38.3%) and
teak (Tectona grandis; 16.7%) were the dominant species in the sampled area of
0.12 ha. Maximum GBH was measured in Haldu (Adina cordifolia; 305 cm). The
122 123
bark of Tectona grandis and Shorea robusta, and the leaves and bark of Mallotus
philippensis are palatable to elephants. The ground cover was found to be
dominated by curry leaves (Murraya koenigii), kala bansa, Shorea robusta, Mallotus
philippensis etc.

Forest/Land use
Settlements: Indian Medicine Pharmaceutical Corporation Limited (IMPCL) colony
Buildings & Artefacts: IMPCL, Prakash Industry, Khulbe Industry and Kumaon
Map of South Patlidun – Chilkiya corridor

Mandal Vikas Nigam (KMVN) Resort
River: Kosi
Road: Ramnagar-Ranikhet National Highway (NH 121)

Elephant Range: North-Western India (Rajaji-Corbett Landscape)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Mohan Industrial Area: 18.4 ha of this industrial park is situated in the middle of
the corridor and has blocked the movement of elephants to a significant extent.
2. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing and fodder and firewood collection by the villagers
of Kunakhet, Kumeria, Mohan and Chukham have affected the quality of corridor
habitat.
124 125
3. High-tension electric line: A high-tension line passes through the corridor and at 3. Expansion of Mohan Industrial Area should be prohibited.
certain places has sagged dangerously low.
4. Relocation of Chukham forest village should be taken up on a priority basis. This
4. Development activities in villages: The construction of the KMVN Resort and will facilitate elephant and tiger movement in the region.
subsequent land conversion is a threat to the corridor, especially in the villages
of Kunakhet and Kumeria, located two kilometres from the boundary of Corbett 5. Relocation of the IMPCL factory and the chemical factory at Garjia is required.
Tiger Reserve.
Land identified to secure the corridor: The state government is working towards
Corridor village: Chukham (86 families) the relocation of Chukham village. Land in Mohan Industrial Area (18.4 ha) also
needs to be acquired and its inhabitants relocated to an alternate site.
Corridor dependent villages: Mohan (35 families), Kunakhet (110 families) and
Kumeria (20 families)
A majority of the people in the area are dependent on employment at IMPCL or

the resorts based in Bohra Kote, Marchula, Dhikuli and Mohan. A small population
undertakes agriculture. However, a substantial portion of agricultural land in
Chukham village was lost due to erosion in the floods in 2010 and 2011.
There is a proposal under consideration for the rehabilitation of Chukham village

by the Government of Uttarakhand.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Elephants frequently visit villages in the area, especially

during the cropping season. Reports of cattle lifting by tigers and leopards are
also common. A report by WWF-India indicates 102 cases of cattle being predated
in Chukham and 38 cases in Mohan between 2006 and 2010.
CONSERVATION PLAN
encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
2. Land use changes in the corridor’s fringe villages, especially Kumeria and
Fig. 4.07: A tusker in the corridor
Kunakhet, should be prohibited.
126 127
4.10
Fatehpur- Gadgadia
This corridor connects the Fatehpur Range of Ramnagar Forest Division with the
Gadgadia Range of Terai Central Forest Division. The Ramnagar-Haldwani road
cuts through the bottlednecked portion of the corridor, which is about four
3D Map showing the landscape of the Fatehpur-Gadgadia Corridor

kilometres wide. Biotic pressure exerted by fringe villages and agriculture on the
leased land in the fringes of the corridor in Terai Central Forest Division are major
threats to the elephant population in the region.
Alternate Name Nihal-Bhakra

State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Ramnagar Forest Division with Terai
Central Forest Division
79° 21’ 36”-79° 25’ 0” E
Major land use Forest and agriculture
Forest type Mixed Plantation
Corridor Habitat Status: A total of 51 plant species were recorded in the sampled
area (0.16 ha). The average GBH and height recorded were 75.41 cm and 15.59
metres respectively. Average tree density was 330 trees per ha. Tectona grandis,
Shorea robusta, Cassia fistula, Ehretia laevis, Mallatus phillipensis and Trewia nudiflora
128 129
were the dominant tree species in the corridor. The ground cover was dominated
by shrubs (64.87 %), herbs (29.93%) and grasses (3.2%). The remaining area was
barren ground.

Ramnagar forest Division: 84
Terai Central Division: 10
It is estimated that about 15-20 elephants use the corridor. The corridor is also
being extensively used by tigers and leopards.
Forest/Land use
Map of the Fatehpur-Gadgadia Corridor

River: Kaligad nullah
Road: Ramnagar-Kaladungi-Haldwani State Highway (SH 41)

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Anthropogenic pressure: Cattle grazing coupled with firewood and fodder
extraction by inhabitants of fringe villages have threatened the habitat quality of
the corridor forest. The eastern and western parts of the corridor have over 14
villages on the fringes.
2. Traffic on the state highway: Heavy traffic on SH 41 threatens elephant movement

between the habitats. On an average, 250 vehicles were recorded moving through
the corridor per hour.
130 131
3. Large-scale farming on encroached khatta and leased land in and around the
corridor.
Corridor dependent villages: Lamachaur, Bidrampur, Rampur, Deipur, Puranpur,

Guljatpur Ramsingh, Gulrajpur banki, Khadakpur, Sakatpur, Surpur and Pratappur
(western side), and Puranpur Kumalia, Ratanpur Isai and Isai Nagar (eastern side).
Human–Elephant Conflict: The corridor falls under three forest ranges: Fatehpur,
Gadgadia and Kaladungi of the Ramnagar and Terai Central Forest Divisions. In
the Kaladungi Range, 16 cases of crop damage and human injury were reported
from 2006 to 2009. Crop-raiding was very high in the Fatehpur Range, with 89
cases reported between 2002 and 2013.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Fig. 4.08: Documenting evidence of elephant presence in the corridor
2. Vehicular speeds on the state highway should be regulated in the corridor area
by the placement of suitable physical barriers, especially between 6 pm and 6 am.
3. Encroached land should be reclaimed and further encroachment of the corridor

forest prevented.
Fig. 4.09: An elephant drinking water from a water source in peak summer season
132 133
4.11
Kilpura-Khatima-Surai
Conservation feasibility: Low
This corridor is located in the Khatima Range and connects it with the Kilpura
and Surai Ranges of Terai East Forest Division. The forest patches of the Khatima
3D Map showing the landscape of the Kilpura-Khatima-Surai Corridor area

Range area are a vital link in the chain of connectivity between Haldwani Forest
Division, Pilibhit Forest Division and the forests of Nepal. Khatima Range has been
fragmented by encroachment and infrastructural development. Elephants cross
the Khatima-Tanak highway and railway track, move between Banrawat Basti
and Chakarpur village, and cross the Sharda main canal between Majgaon and
Pachouri villages.
State Uttarakhand
Connectivity Kilpura Range, Khatima and Surai
Ranges of Terai East Division
Length and Width 2 km and 0.75 -3.5 km
80° 0’ 55”-80° 3’ 58” E
Major land use Forest, settlement, agriculture,
Sharda canal, NH 125, railway line
Major habitation/settlements Banrawat Basti
Forest type Dry deciduous sal forest and
plantation
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional; mostly by lone bulls
and small herds
Corridor Habitat Status: The corridor area along NH 125 and in its adjoining forest
134 135
blocks is dominated by Tectona grandis. The forest department has demarcated

an area of 50 ha for the plantation of bamboo for elephants in Gosukuan Beat.
A tree density of 475 trees per ha was estimated in the corridor area. Tectona
grandis (92%) was the major tree species found in the sampled area of 0.08 ha,
followed by Acacia catechu (5%). Ground cover was completely open in the teak
plantation area. The average GBH was found to be 68.63 cm with a highest GHB
of 119 cm.

Terai East Forest Division: 21
Map of the Kilpura-Khatima-Surai Corridor

Forest/Land use
Settlements: Chakarpur, Majgaon, Banrawat Basti (encroachment) and Naya Basti
(encroachment)
Road: Khatima-Tanakpur (NH 125)
Railway track: Khatima-Tanakpur
Buildings/Artefacts: Sharda main canal

Protected Area: Nandhaur Wildlife Sanctuary

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Encroachments: Encroachments in the Gosukuan Beat, namely Banrawat Basti,
Chakarpur Bilheri and Naya Basti along the Sharda canal, and Pachoria lie directly
in the elephant path towards Nakatal forest.
2. Settlements: Banrawat Basti, Chakarpur Bilheri, Naya Basti and Majgaon
136 137
settlements on either side of Sharda canal have narrowed the width of the elephant conflict have taken place in Kilpura Range. Five cases of human death
corridor. and two cases of human injury due to elephants were reported in Terai East
Division between 2011 and 2013.
3. Anthropogenic pressure: Cattle grazing and fuelwood collection in the corridor
forest by about 25 fringe villages has degraded the habitat quality. Cattle lifting by tigers has also been reported by villagers.
4. Traffic: NH 125 connecting Khatima and Tanakpur (now four-laned) is a busy road
due to its proximity and connectivity with Nepal and Uttar Pradesh. On average, CONSERVATION PLAN
266 vehicles per hour were recorded in the corridor area, with 384 vehicles per
hour plying between 6am and 6 pm, and 147 vehicles per hour between 6 pm 1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
and 6 am. department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent
5. Sharda canal: This canal passes through the corridor. A high water level and
strong current near Lohiya Head obstruct elephant movement between the 2. Encroachments in the corridor area of Banrawat Basti, Chakarpur Bilheri and
habitats. Naya Basti could be relocated in consultation with villagers. The corridor area
should be monitored regularly to prevent further encroachment by fringe villages.
6. Rail traffic: 18 trains run through the corridor of which four run between 6 pm
and 6 am. The track is metre gauge and there is local demand to convert this to Land identified to secure the corridor
broad gauge, which will worsen the situation.
Settlement Families Area
Corridor Villages: Banrawat Basti (15 families), Chakarpur Bilheri , Naya Basti (15 Banrawat Basti 15 8.6 ha
families) and Majgaon settlements (300 families) are located in the corridor. Of Chakarpur Bilheri 125-130 20 ha
these, Banrawat Basti and Naya Basti consist entirely of encroached land. Some Naya Basti along Sharda
15 10.8 ha
encroachment is reported in Chakarpur Bilheri (130 families) as well. canal
Corridor dependent villages: Bilheeri, Pachpokariya, Devipura, Banbasa,

Bamanpuri, Bhajanpur, Kutuwa patti, Majgaon, Pachouri, Lohiya Head, Chakarpur,
Gosu Kuman, Bhudai, Amauan and Jhan Kaieya.
Human – Elephant conflict: Crop-raiding by elephants is a major concern in the

area. Discussions with villagers revealed that since 2012 and 2013 elephants
have been visiting the villages in two seasons, where earlier they only visited in the
winters. Villagers do not claim damages for crop losses due to low compensation
and delays. Forest department records revealed that most instances of human-
138 139
05
Elephant corridors of
CENTRAL india
Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Subrat Kr Behera,
K Ramkumar, Chanchal Kr Sar, D Swain and
R Sukumar
18 19
THE ELEPHANT HABITATS OF CENTRAL INDIA are spread over an traffic on National Highway 33, the construction of the Subarnarekha canal,
area of 21,000 sq km in the states of Jharkhand, Odisha, Chhattisgarh and part the Tatanagar-Chandil railway, various stone crushing units that have come up
of southern West Bengal, at times extending to Madhya Pradesh and Bihar. along the highway, and the expansion of human settlements and agriculture
The 3128-odd elephants (MoEF&CC, 2017) in this range occupy the most land almost till the foothills of Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary. Habitat degradation
fragmented elephant habitats in the country; habitats that have been degraded has also threatened elephant movement between Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary
and fragmented due to mining, shifting cultivation and linear infrastructural and the Matha Range of Purulia Forest Division (West Bengal). The elephant
elements (highways, railways, canals etc). Human-elephant conflict is very high habitats of the Mosabani Range of Dhalbhum Forest Division have also been
and although the area supports less than 10% of the elephant population of severely affected by increased agricultural activities and anthropogenic
the country, it accounts for almost 45% of all human deaths due to elephants pressure, impairing the movement of elephants from Mosabani Range to
in India. Rakhamines Range of Dhalbhum Forest Division. The degradation of elephant
habitats in Jharkhand has also resulted
Jharkhand has two distinct elephant populations, viz. Palamau and Singhbhum, in the migration of elephants to the The degradation of
and about 678 elephants (MoEF&CC, 2017). The Palamau population occupies adjoining areas of Chhattisgarh, leading elephant habitats
about 1200 sq km of Betla National Park, Palamau Tiger Reserve and adjoining to increased human-elephant conflict. in Jharkhand and
areas. In recent years, elephants have started moving into new areas of To strengthen the conservation of the
Odisha has resulted in
Hazaribagh, Ranchi, Ramgarh, Bokaro, Dhanbad, Giridih, Deogarh, Dumka, Singhbhum elephant habitats, which
migration of elephants
Pakur, Godda and Sahibganj, passing through fragmented forest patches, lack a Protected Area, Project Elephant
has declared 4529 sq km of the
to the adjoining areas
agricultural land and human settlements. Elephants have also started moving
to Bihar and West Bengal from these areas. This has increased human-elephant elephant habitat as Elephant Reserve I. of Chhattisgarh, leading
conflict, especially crop depredation, and it has become a major challenge for to increased human-
Division managers to manage these elephants and minimise conflict. The elephant habitats of Odisha are elephant conflict.
spread across 11,000 sq km of forests.
The Singhbhum population occupies about 2570 sq km of the available forest In Odisha, almost 72% of the elephant population is spread across 14 Forest
area of Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and the forests of Saranda, Porhat, Kolhan, Divisions – Angul circle (Angul, Satkosia, Athmallik, Athgarh and Dhenkanal
Saraikala (formerly North Chaibasa) and Dhalbhum Forest Divisions. About divisions), Baripada circle (Baripada, Similipal Tiger Reserve, Balasore, Karanjia
ten elephant corridors are located in this landscape. Mining is one of the most and Rairangpur divisions), Sambalpur circle (Bamra and Rairakhol divisions)
serious threats to the elephant habitats of this region, with Singhbhum being and Rourkella circle (Bonai and Deogarh divisions), all on the north bank of the
known for its large reserves of hematite iron ore, constituting 25% of the total Mahanadi River – and requires larger conservation attention. A burgeoning
known reserves in India. human population, spread of human settlements and ensuing development
activities (mining, industry, linear infrastructure etc) have degraded and
Mining activities in the Manoharpur mines and the transport of ore have fragmented elephant (and other wildlife) habitats in the state, leading to
severely affected the overall habitat and threatened the movement of isolation of animal populations and increased interface with humans. This
elephants in these areas. Elephant movement between Dalma Wildlife has led to elevated levels of human-elephant conflict. Over 461 people have
Sanctuary and Saraikala Forest Division has been threatened by the heavy lost their lives in elephant-related incidents and about Rs 7.5 crore has been
142 143
paid by the state government as ex-gratia support for human deaths caused and Tapoban (Jhargram, West Bengal) area has been severely threatened by
by elephants between April 2009 and February 2017. During the same period, mining and agricultural activities, and elephants have changed their route
about Rs 98.8 crores has also been paid for crop depredation by elephants. between Nayagram, Chandabila, Keshorekha (Kharagpur Forest Division) to
Linear infrastructure elements like railway lines (Chatterjee et al., 2014), irrigation Rasgovindpur (Baripada Forest Division), Nilgiri of Balasore Wildlife Division
canals and roads have further fragmented the wildlife habitat. The Rengali Dam and Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary. From 2013, Odisha began construction
constructed across the Brahmani River in Rengali village (Angul district) and the of irrigation canals, trenches and live fencing to block the movement of
two irrigation canals aimed at improving the state’s agricultural prosperity have elephants coming from West Bengal. The Mayurbhanj Elephant Reserve has
severely fragmented the wildlife habitats to the north of the Mahanadi River been constituted to strengthen the conservation of elephants in this area.
in the state. While these development activities have facilitated cultivation in
areas not earlier conducive to agriculture, they have created physical barriers The population of Satkosia-Baisipalli and adjacent areas of Athmallik and
to animal movement, especially for larger mammals like elephants, leading to Angul Forest Division is situated in the central part of Odisha and includes two
increased conflict particularly in the Dhenkanal and Angul districts. Protected Areas: Satkosia Gorge Tiger Reserve and Baisipalli Wildlife Sanctuary,
forming part of the Mahanadi Elephant Reserve (1023 sq km). Satkosia-Baisipalli
The Mahanadi River divides Odisha’s elephant habitats into two parts. While the forms a continuous habitat bifurcated
habitats to the north of the river (Mayurbhanj, Keonjhar, Bamra, Rairakhol, Angul, by the Mahanadi River. Sar and Lahiri- In Odisha, the Rengali
Dhenkanal, Athamallik, Bonai and Athagarh areas) are threatened by severe Choudhury (2002) has identified Dam constructed across
mining activities, a growing human population and expansion of agriculture, the five major crossing points used by the Brahmani River,
habitats to the south (about 5030 sq km) are threatened by shifting cultivation. elephants to cross the Mahanadi. The as well as two major
There are four major elephant populations in the state.The population in construction of the Manjhor dam has
irrigation canals, have
Similipal-Kuldiha-Hadgarh and adjoining areas comprises about 500 elephants. obstructed the movement of elephants
fragmented habitats
It is spread over three Protected Areas, viz. Similipal Tiger Reserve, Hadgarh between Taleipathar Reserve Forest
Wildlife Sanctuary and Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary, and is in continuity with Noto and the Baruni East and Baruni West
north of the Mahanadi
Reserve Forest, Sukinda Reserve Forest and Badampahar Reserve Forest. Four Reserve Forests, an important link
elephant corridors are located in this landscape. between Satkosia and Khalasuni. The construction of the Talcher-Sambalpur
railway line, irrigation canals, mining and illegal felling of trees have led to the
While Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary, Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and Similipal fragmentation of elephant habitats in this area and an increase in human-
National Park were once part of a larger continuous stretch of forest area, elephant conflict. Three elephant corridors are located in this landscape.
Kuldiha has now been disconnected from Similipal. The elephant movement
between Hadgarh and Kuldiha has been severely hindered by chromite The population of the South Keonjhar plateau and adjacent areas is spread over
mining at Baula Reserve Forest as well as the expansion of settlements and 2600 sq km and includes the Deogan, Ghatgaon and Telkoi Ranges of Keonjhar
agricultural land, resulting in increased human-elephant conflict. Similarly, Forest Division and the Kamakhyanagar East and West Ranges of Dhenkanal
elephant movement from Similipal (Odisha) to South Chaibasa (Jharkhand) Forest Division. Considerable deterioration of elephant habitat has occurred in
occurs through the degraded forest patches of Badampahar Reserve Forest, the Dhenkanal Forest Division due to the construction of the Rengali irrigation
Budhipat and Basila Reserve Forest. Movement between the north Similipal canal at Samal as well as other medium-sized irrigation canals. This, coupled with
144 145
encroachment, has led to habitat fragmentation – though elephants still move of elephants into Chhattisgarh and at times extending to Madhya Pradesh.
between the Kahneijena Reserve Forest and Anantapur Reserve Forest across Historically, according to Forsyth (1889), northern Chhattisgarh used to have
the Brahmani River, crossing the Rengali canal near Joka village and at a few elephants. However, they became locally extinct in the early part of the 20th
other points. Habitat degradation and encroachment in and around Saptasajya century (Krishnan, 1972). In 1988, elephants entered Chhattisgarh from Jharkhand
Reserve Forest in Dhenkanal Forest Division has severely hindered the elephant and caused extensive damage to life and property. It was thought that these
movement between north-east Dhenkanal and south-west Dhenkanal. This, elephants had strayed from their original migration routes and had come to
along with heavy mining in the neighbouring Sukinda Range of Athagarh Forest Chhattisgarh by mistake. In 1993, the government of what was then Madhya
Division and the Daitan range of Anandapur (WL) Division, has severed the Pradesh captured 10 elephants in order to prevent any more elephants from
elephant connectivity between Angul and Similipal. Three elephant corridors migrating into Chhattisgarh. However, just two years after this operation, i.e.
are located in this landscape although the future of elephant movement from from 1995 onwards, elephants began regularly gaining access to Chhattisgarh,
Anantapur Reserve Forest to Aswakhola Reserve Forest and Kapilas Wildlife disproving the previous capture theory.
Sanctuary is bleak. Mining, irrigation canals, encroachment and monoculture
plantations have led to the shrinkage and degradation of elephant habitat and Human-elephant conflict cases have been increasing from the year 2000 as the
increased conflict in the Keonjhar Forest Division. number of migratory elephants coming into Chhattisgarh has steadily increased
(Singh, 2002). In 1988, only 18 elephants migrated into Chhattisgarh. From 1998
The Madanpur-Rampur-Kotgarh and Chandrapur population is to the south of onwards the elephant population in the state has increased gradually, reaching
the Mahanadi and covers the districts of Phulbani, Kalahandi, Ganjam, Gajapati 247 in 2017 (MoEF&CC, 2017). This population occupies about 3625 sq km of
and Raygada. A major part of this area is under shifting cultivation and Kotgarh forest area in Surguja Division, Koriya Division, Surajpur Division, Jashpur Division,
and Lakhari are the only Protected Areas. Elephant movement between Kotgarh Balrampur Division, Dharamjaigarh Division, Korba Division, Raigarh Division,
Wildlife Sanctuary and Kalahandi used to occur in the past but has now ceased Badalkhol Wildlife Sanctuary, Samarsot Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamorpingla Wildlife
due to shifting cultivation and encroachment. Elephant movement between Sanctuary and Guru Ghasidas National Park. Two new elephant corridors have
Kotgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and Chandrapur Reserve Forest takes place through been identified in the state, namely Tamorpingla–Jashpur and Surguja–Jashpur.
degraded forest patches. The populations of Lakhari Valley Wildlife Sanctuary Human-elephant conflict in Chhattisgarh has resulted in 290 human deaths
and Mahendragiri have been isolated from each other and from other elephant between 2009-10 and 2016-17. A sum of Rs 7.3 crores has been paid as ex-gratia
populations. The current corridor in this region is between Kotagarh Wildlife for human deaths and Rs 14.25 crores for crop damage and loss of property.
Sanctuary and Pankhalgudi Reserve Forest.
Southern West Bengal also supports a sizable elephant population (194 elephants;
Chhattisgarh has a small elephant population which had originally migrated MoEF&CC, 2017), mainly in the Puruliya (Purulia Division, Kangsabati North
from Jharkhand and Odisha during the 1980s and 1990s. During the last few Division and Kangasabati South Division), West Midnapore (Midnapore Division,
decades, the forested areas in these two states have been degraded due to Rupnarayan Division, Jhargram Division and Kharagpur Division) and Bankura
illegal felling, encroachments, industrialisation and mining (Singh and Chowdhury, districts (Bankura North Division and Bankura South Division) (Chanda, undated).
1999; Singh, 2000). The deterioration in habitat quality has forced elephants to Elephants from Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary (Jharkhand) move to West Midnapore
undertake long-range disoriented movements by using smaller forest patches and Kangsabati South Forest Divisions, and from Ranchi to Puruliya Forest Division,
to move to larger forest areas. This is one of the major causes for the migration and from Baripada Forest Division (Odisha) to Kharagpur Forest Division.
146 147
148
Elephant corridors in Central India - I

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
Elephant corridors in Central India - II

149
150
Elephant Corridors in Central India - III
Elephant Corridors in Central India - IV

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
151
5.01
Tamorpingla – Jashpur
Ecological Priority: High
Conservation Feasibility: Medium
This corridor connects the elephant population of Tamorpingla Wildlife Sanctuary

to Jashpur Forest Division. Elephants move from the Ghui Range of Tamorpingla
3D map showing the landscape of the Tamorpingla-Jashpur Corridor

through several settlements, agricultural lands and fragmented forest patches of
the Pratappur Range of Surajpur Forest Division and the Rajpur and Shankargarh
Ranges of Balrampur Forest Division, leading on to the Sanna Range of Jashpur
Forest Division. The elephants cross the Ambikapur-Pratappur highway between
Dharampur and Gotgaon, and the Ambikapur-Semarsot highway near Chanchi.
State Chhattisgarh
Connectivity Tamorpingla Wildlife Sanctuary and
Jashpur Forest Division
Length and Width 35 km and 0-1 km
Geographical coordinates 23° 15’ 22”- 23° 31’ 45” N
83° 5’ 8”- 83° 23’ 26” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Revenue and Patta
Land
Major land use Agriculture, Settlement, Plantation
and forest
Major habitation/settlements About 20 villages in the corridor and
10-12 on its fringes
Forest type Plantation and mixed dry deciduous
and sal forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; especially during cropping
season (August to November/
December)
152 153
Corridor habitat status: The corridor forest consists of fragmented forest patches.
The vegetation is dominated by sal (Shorea robusta), most of it being planted by
the forest department. Other associated species present in the corridor area are
Tectona grandis, Cassia fistula, Terminalia tomentosa, Embilica officinalis, Anogeissus
latifolia, Diospyros melanoxylon, Pongamia pinnata, Madhuca indica, Boswellia
serrata, Butea frondosa, Sizigium cumini etc. Patches of Dendrocalamus strictus
were also seen. Signs of wood cutting and lopping were noticed in most of the
tree species. The ground cover consisted of grasses (50%) followed by barren
ground (21%), herbs (15 %) and shrubs (14%).
Map of the Tamorpingla-Jashpur Corridor

Tamorpingla Wildlife Sanctuary: 30-40
Jashpur Forest Division: 58-60
(Elephant Census Chhattisgarh, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Mixed dry deciduous forest dominated by sal and teak plantation
Settlements: More than 20 villages in the corridor and about 10-12 fringe villages
Agriculture: Paddy, sugarcane and maize
Highway: Ambikapur- Pratappur and Ambikapur- Semarsot (NH 343)

Elephant Range: Central India
Nearest Protected Area: Tamorpingla Wildlife Sanctuary
Elephant Reserve: Badalkhol-Tamarpingla
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Agriculture and Settlements: More than 20 villages are located in the corridor
and about 10-12 villages on the fringes of the corridor. The expansion of these
villages and the biotic pressure they exert has threatened the corridor habitat.
154 155
2. People’s dependency on forest resources: Fuelwood and NTFP collection has distributed to minimise fuelwood extraction from the forest. This will also help
degraded the corridor forest. prevent retaliation against elephants in these areas.
3. Vehicular traffic: There is high vehicular traffic on the Ambikapur-Rajpur- 3. Habitat improvement activities, including the plantation of native species and
Ramaujganj highway (NH 343) passing through the corridor. protection of corridor forests, should be taken up on a priority basis.
4. Changed cultivation patterns, with maize and sugarcane being grown on a large 4. Alternate cropping patterns need to be be practiced, weaning villagers away
scale, are attracting elephants to agriculture fields. Sugar factories have also from growing sugarcane and maize.
come up close to the corridor.
5. No construction should be allowed on either side of the highways passing
Corridor villages: Pahiya, Ghat Pendari (Ghui Range), Chandora, Samai, Daldali, through the corridor.
Gotagaon, Tukudad, Sidhara, Dharampur, Ganeshpur (Pratappur Range), Chora,
Dhuppi, Narsingpur, Lamnia, Chilmakala, Baski, Amdari (Rajpur Range), Jargim
(Shankargarh Range) and Dagri (Sanna Range).
Corridor dependent villages: Mani, Damurkholi, Sarhari, Khorma, Madannagar

(Pratappur Range), Karji, Chanchi, Patrapara (Rajpur Range), Manoharpur and
Podikudh (Sankargarh Range).
Human-Elephant Conflict: All the corridor and fringe villagers are affected by
conflict with a high level of crop and property damage reported every year.
More than 45-50 houses are reported damaged in and around the corridor area
annually.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Eco-development support needs to be provided to corridor and fringe villages

to reduce dependency on forest resources. Fuel-efficient stoves should be
Fig. 5.01: A house damaged by elephants in the corridor
156 157
5.02
Surguja – Jashpur
This corridor connects the elephant population of Surguja Forest Division with
that of Jashpur Forest Division. Elephants move through several settlements,
3D map showing the landscape of the Surguja - Jashpur Corridor

agricultural lands and fragmented forest patches from the Sitapur, Ambikapur
and Lundra Ranges of Surguja Forest Division to the Rajpur (near Chanchi) and
Shankargarh Ranges of Balrampur Forest Division, finally leading to the Sanna
Range of Jashpur Forest Division.
State Chhattisgarh
Connectivity Surguja FD with Jashpur FD
83° 13’ 5”- 83° 25’ 20” E
Legal status Patta Land, Revenue Land and
Reserve Forest
Major land use Forests, agriculture and settlements
Major habitation/settlements About 12-14 villages in the corridor
Forest type Plantation and mixed sal deciduous
forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular, especially during cropping
season (August to November/
December)
area, dominated by Shorea robusta. Other plants species found were Terminalia
158 159
tomentosa, Tectona grandis, Buchania lanzon, Bombex ceiba, Cassia fistula, Embilica
officinalis, Anogeissus latifolia, Diospyros melanoxylon, Madhuca indica etc. Maximum
average GBH was recorded in Bombax ceiba (34 cm), followed by Madhuca indica
(21.75 cm), Shorea robusta (17.42 cm) and Buchania lanzon (17.17 cm). Ground
cover vegetation included grasses (35%), shrubs (25%), herbs (15%) and barren
ground (25%).

About 40-50 elephants extensively use this corridor as part of their annual
seasonal migration, especially from August to November/December.
Surguja Forest Division: 20-25
Map of the Surguja - Jashpur Corridor

Balrampur Forest Division: 15-20
Jashpur Forest Division: 58-60
(Elephant Census Chhattisgarh, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest: Mixed dry deciduous forest dominated by sal
Settlements: About 12-14 villages in the corridor and about 18 villages on
the fringes
Agriculture: Paddy, maize, sugarcane, millet
Roadways: Ambikapur-Rajpur-Ramanujganj (NH 343) and Ambikapur-Sitapur-
Pathalgaon (NH 78)
Other structures: Baki Dam

Nearest Protected Area: Semarsot Wildlife Sanctuary
Elephant Reserve: Badalkhol-Tamorpingla
160 161
HUMAN DIMENSIONS deaths caused by elephants were reported in and around the Sitapur Range of
Surguja Forest Division between 2009 and 2013. A total of 228 cases of house
Threats damage by elephants were also recorded in the Sitapur Range.
1. Agriculture and human settlements: There is a large number of villages in and
around the corridor exerting tremendous biotic pressure on the corridor.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Vehicular traffic: The Ambikapur-Rajpur-Semarsot (NH 343) and the Ambikapur-

Sitapur-Pathalgaon (NH 78) highways pass through the corridor. Six-wheeled and
four-wheeled vehicles were recorded around the clock.
3. Use of forest resources: Fuelwood and NTFP collection by inhabitants of corridor

2. Alternate cropping patterns should be introduced, weaning villagers away from
and fringe villages has degraded the corridor forest and connecting habitats.
sugarcane and maize.
4. Changed cultivation patterns, with maize and sugarcane being grown on a large
3. Habitat improvement in open forest areas and protection of the corridor
scale, attract elephants to agricultural fields.
forests should be taken up on a priority basis.
There are several villages located in and around the corridor. People are mostly
4. No construction should be allowed on either side of the highways passing
engaged in farming and are also dependent on forest areas for fuelwood and
through the corridor.
NTFP collection.
Corridor villages: Kalipur, Gahila (Surguja Range), Ajirnakala, Kakana (Ambikapur

Range), Balrampur, Banda, Bhaski and Amdari (Rajpur Range), Jargim (Shankargarh
Range) and Dagri (Sanna Range).
Corridor dependent villages: Gangapur, Barkali, Sikilma, Raghunathpur (Sitapur

Range), Ranpurkhud, Jamdi, Parsa, Hasuli (Ambikapur Range), Balrampur, Barion,
Bhaski, Chanchi, Patrapara (Rajpur Range), Jamoni, Murka (Lundra Range),
Manoharpur and Podikudh (Sankargarh Range).
Human-Elephant Conflict: Many villages in the corridor area – viz. Parsa,

Baghima, Chanchi, Khokhania, Rawatpur, Duppi, Chachi, Arra, Narsingpur, Bada,
Parasaguddi, Saini, Okra, Rajpur, Baria, Kakna, Kodu, Gopalpur, Parsaguri, Baria,
Lao etc – are affected by depredations caused by elephants. Six cases of human
Fig. 5.02: Microhabitat in the corridor
162 163
5.03
MAHILONG – KALIMATI
Ecological Priority: Medium
Conservation Feasibility: Low
The Mahilong -Kalimati corridor connects forest blocks in the Mahilong and Bundu
Ranges under Ranchi Forest Division in Jharkhand, with the Jhalda and Bagmundi
Ranges under Purulia Forest Division in West Bengal. Elephant movement from
3D map showing the landscape of the Mahilong - Kalimati Corridor

Mahilong takes place in two directions. One goes south towards the Bagmundi
Range (near Hesla) through Bundu, Sonahato and Jamudag, crosses the
Subarnarekha River near Pusti, and then through Hesla to the Bagmundi Range.
The other moves to the Jhalda Range and crosses Subarnarekha River north of
Silli and south of Muri. State Highway 4 connecting Balarampur and Jhalda passes
through the corridor in the Duarsuni Protected Forest. The establishment of a
hydro-electric power project in the Ayodhya Hills near Baghmundi has affected
the elephant population in Ayodhya Hills and the usage of this corridor.
State Jharkhand and West Bengal

Connectivity Mahilong and Bundu Ranges of
Ranchi Forest Division with Jhalda
and Baghmundi Ranges of Purulia
Forest Division
Length and Width 18 km and 0-0.5 km
85° 46’ 6”- 85° 54’ 25” E
Legal status Protected Forest and Patta Lands
Major land use Forest, agriculture fields, human
habitations
Major habitation/settlements About 18 villages in and around the
corridor
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular, throughout the year
164 165
Corridor habitat status: The corridor comprises degraded and barren lands
with Butea monosperma plants, agriculture fields, human habitations and the
Subarnarekha River intersecting its area.

Ranchi Forest Division: 17-20
Purulia Forest Division: 10-12
(Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012 and Elephant Census West Bengal, 2010)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous forest (mostly degraded forest patches)
Map of the Mahilong - Kalimati Corridor

Agriculture: Mostly paddy and vegetables
Human habitation: Major settlements include Khamar, Hesla, Pusti, Rangamati,
Bhakuyadi, Jintudih, Dibadih, Salsudi, Poring Chauli, Jamudag, Saread, Dirsir,
Sonahatu, Baghadih, Bhorangadih, Damari, Bundu and Edalhatu
River: Subarnarekha River
Roadway: Jhalda-Baghmundi State Highway (SH 4)
Railway: Chitarpur-Muri-Chandil

Mountain Range: Ayodhya Hills
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human habitation: Closely located and densely populated villages are situated
in the corridor. The expansion of human habitations has hindered elephant
movement in the corridor.
166 167
2. Agriculture: Vast expanses of agricultural fields are present in the corridor. CONSERVATION PLAN
Farmers cultivate paddy and vegetables extensively. Levels of crop depredation
by elephants are high. 1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
3. Railway traffic: A section of the Chandil-Muri railway track passes through the encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
corridor. In 2008, an elephant was killed in a train-hit incident near Bhusudih
village. 2. Measures should be taken to mitigate human-elephant conflict, which fosters a
negative attitude among local communities towards elephant conservation.
4. Hydro-electric project: The establishment of a hydel power project in the Ayodhya
Hills near Baghmundi affects once continuous elephant movement from the 3. Habitat restoration of the corridor forest, especially in Puruliya Division, needs
Hensla Protected Forest to the Ayodhya hill ranges. to be prioritised.
5. State Highway: SH 4 connecting Balrampur and Jhalda passes through the

corridor in the Duarsuni Protected Forest, though traffic flow is not heavy.
Densely located and populated villages are present in the corridor. Agriculture
is the main source of livelihood and the villagers extensively cultivate paddy and
vegetables.
Corridor villages: Hesla, Pusti, Bhakuyadi, Jintudih, Dibadih, Poring Chauli and
Sonahatu are major settlements.
Corridor dependent villages: Khamar, Rangamati, Salsudi, Jamudag, Saread,

Dirsir, Baghadih, Bhorangadih, Damari, Bundu and Edalhatu.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Crop depredation by elephants is the main cause of

human-elephant conflict in this area. Farmers suffer high economic losses, more
due to the damage caused to vegetables rather than to paddy. Two elephant
deaths occurred due to train-hits near the corridor on September 26, 2016.
Fig. 5.03: The Chandil-Muri railway line passing through the corridor
168 169
5.04
CHANDIL – MATHA
Ecological Priority: Low
This corridor connects the Gundu and Ramnagar Protected Forests located
in the Chandil Range of Saraikela Forest Division in Jharkhand, with the Matha
Reserve Forest located in the Matha Range of Purulia Forest Division in West
Bengal. Elephants move through fragmented forest patches (Burudih Protected
3D map showing the landscape of the Chandil - Matha Corridor

Forest, Kadla Protected Forest, Chatarma Protected Forest and Digadih Protected
Forest), and densely located human habitations with agriculture fields. Elephants
from Matha Reserve Forest cross State Highway 4 in the Digadih Protected
Forest between the villages of Bansidih and Buchungdih, then move to Ramnagar
Protected Forest through Burudih Protected Forest, Chaturma Protected Forest
and Kadla Protected Forest, and over ten villages.

Connectivity Chandil Range of Saraikela Forest
Division with Matha Range of Purulia
Forest Division
86° 5’ 56”- 86° 8’ 22” E
Legal status Protected Forest, Patta Lands and
Revenue Lands
Major land use Human habitation, agriculture fields
and forests
Major habitations/settlements Ramnagar, Murugdih, Jugilang,
Puriara, Patardih, Kadla, Chatarma,
Lakri, Burudih, Ponda, Dumurdihi,
Jopahadi, Bansdih, Srirampur,
Khududih and Dhaska
Frequency of usage by elephants Rare
170 171
Corridor habitat status: Forest patches of the Kadla, Burudih, Chatarma and
Digidih Protected Forests lie within the corridor. Digidih Protected Forest (through
which State Highway 4 passes) is an open forest dominated by Shorea robusta.
Plantation of Acacia auriculiformis is also present along the forest border in the
corridor. The forest patches are severely degraded.

Saraikela Forest Division: 30
Purulia Forest Division: 10-12
(Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012 and Elephant Census West Bengal, 2012)
Map of the Chandil - Matha Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous with fragmented forest patches
Human habitation: Ramnagar, Murugdih, Jugilang, Puriara, Patardih, Kadla,
Chatarma, Lakri, Burudih, Ponda, Dumurdihi, Jopahadi, Bansdih, Srirampur,
Khududih and Dhaska
Agriculture: Paddy
Roadway/Highway: State Highway 4 connecting Balarampur and Jhalda
Railway Track: Chandil-Muri

Mountain Range: Chotanagpur Plateau
Elephant range: East-Central India
Nearest Protected Area: Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human habitation and agriculture fields: The corridor comprises at least 16
villages and a vast expanse of agricultural fields, which disconnects the forest
172 173
between the Gundu and Ramnagar Protected Forests and Matha Reserve Forest. corridor area could be notified as an ecofragile area to provide legal protection.
2. Encroachment: People from villages surrounding Kadla, Burudih, Chatarma and 2. Habitat restoration of degraded forest patches in Kadla, Burudih, Chatarma
Digidih Protected Forests have encroached upon the corridor forest, causing and Digidih Protected Forests should be taken up.
fragmentation and disconnection within the corridor.
3. Clearing of encroached territory in the corridor and subsequent habitat
3. Biotic pressure: Villagers of corridor fringe villages depend upon the corridor restoration will be required to increase connectivity.
forest for fuelwood, Shorea robusta leaves, other NTFP and livestock grazing.
4. Highway: SH4 connecting Balarampur and Jhalda bisects the corridor in the
Digidih Protected Forest. Vehicular traffic is seen mostly during the day.
5. Railway track: The track connecting Chandil and Muri passes along the Ramnagar
Protected Forest near Gunda village. This has obstructed elephant movement
between Ramnagar Protected Forest and Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary.
Around sixteen villages are located in and around the corridor. Villagers of the
fringe villages are mostly dependent on agriculture and daily wage labour for
their livelihood. They graze livestock and collect fuelwood, Shorea robusta leaves
and other NTFP from the corridor forest.
Corridor villages: Ramnagar, Murugdih, Ruriara, Kadla, Chatarma, Burudih,

Bansdih and Srirampur
Corridor dependent villages: Jugilang, Patardih, Chatarma, Lakri, Ponda,

Dumurdihi, Jopahadi, Khududih and Dhaska
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest Fig. 5.04: State Highway 4 passing through the corridor
encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement. The
174 175
5.05
DALMA - CHANdil
This corridor connects Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary with the Chandil Range of
Seraikela Forest Division. National Highway 33 and 32, and the railway track
connecting Jamshedpur and Chandil, with steep embankments between
Saharbera and Patta villages, bisect the corridor, hindering elephant movement.
3D map showing the landscape of the Dalma - Chandil Corridor

Elephants cross the road and railway track under the bridge and enter Golchakar
(a circular intersection), then move to the Chandil Range through narrow forests
and private lands. They also cross NH 33 near Patta village to move between
the habitats.
State Jharkhand
Connectivity Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary of Ranchi
Forest Division and Chandil Range of
Seraikela Forest Division
86° 0’ 33”- 86° 3’ 31” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Patta Land
Major land use Forest, agriculture and settlement
Major habitation/settlements Rudia (Nargadih hamlet)
Frequency of usage by elephants Rare; seasonal
Corridor habitat status: The corridor comprises fragmented and degraded

forest patches. The vegetation is dominated by sal (Shorea robusta) and other
species including Buchanania lauzen, Anogeissu slatifolia, Diospyros melanoxylon,
Cleistanthus collinus, Bombax ceiba, Terminalia sp, Adina cordifolia, Madhuca latifolia,
176 177
Gmelina arborea etc. The ground cover is mostly bushes of Lantana sp, Helicterisi
sora etc and barren ground.

Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary: 156
Seraikela Forest Division: 30
(Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous sal forest
Human habitation: Nargadih, Darda, Rudia and Balidiha
Agriculture: Paddy
River: Subarnarekha River and canal
Map of the Dalma - Chandil Corridor

Roadway: NH 33 and 32 and Chandil-Kandra-Seraikela road
Railway Track: Chandil-Jamshedpur
Buildings/Artefacts: High-tension power line

Elephant Range: East-Central India
Elephant Reserve: Singhbhum Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Road: National Highway 33 connecting Jamshedpur with Ranchi and another
road connecting Chandil with Kandra pass through the corridor. Vehicular traffic
remains high on both roads around the clock: 480 vehicles per hour during the
day and 207 vehicles per hour at night on NH 33, and 362 vehicles per hour during
the day and 171vehicles per hour at night on the Chandil-Kandra-Seraikela road.
2. Expansion of NH 33 is in progress and this will further fragment the corridor.
178 179
3. A railway track connecting Jamshedpur and Chandil passes through the corridor 2. Expansion of NH 33 in the corridor area should be accompanied with
with steep embankments inside the corridor area, obstructing elephant appropriate mitigation measures.
movement. Traffic intensity on the track was high, with 4.6 trains per hour during
the day and four trains per hour at night (in 2015). 3. An overpass is needed on the railway track passing through the corridor.
Embankments along the railway track near Patta village need to be made less steep.
4. Human habitation: Rudia, Nargadih (Nargadih, Chalakbera Tola), Chaipur, Darda
and Patta are villages located in and around the corridor forest, considerably 4. In consultation with the villagers, 34 acres of private lands in Nargadih, Darda,
reducing the width available for elephant movement. Human dependence on Rudia and Balidiha villages could be secured.
forest resources (fuelwood, NTFP, cattle grazing) has further deteriorated the
5. Five families from Nargadih hamlet located inside the corridor could be
forest.
voluntarily relocated outside the corridor.
5. Agriculture: Expansion of agriculture fields in the villages of Darda and Balidiha

6. Habitat restoration is required in the degraded patches of Chandil Range in
has fragmented the corridor.
the corridor.
6. Canal: About 200 m of the Subarnarekha irrigation canal passes through the
7. The construction of an overpass on Subarnarekha canal in the corridor area is
corridor, hindering elephant movement.
in progress and will facilitate elephant movement.
7. Degradation of Chandil Reserve Forest due to biotic pressure of fringe villages. 8. Coordination is needed between Highway Authorities, the Railways and
Irrigation, Revenue and Forest Departments to plan mitigation measures while
Corridor villages: Nargadih, and the agricultural fields of Rudia, Darda, Chainpur undertaking developmental activities in the region.
and Balidih villages are located inside the corridor forest. These areas have
reduced the width of the corridor. Land identified to secure the corridor
About 34 acres of agricultural lands in Balidih, Darda and Rudia villages have been
Corridor dependent villages: Balidiha (90 families), Rudia (460 families), Nargadih, identified for the corridor’s securement. In addition, one acre of land is to be
Chalakbera Tola, Patta (272 families), Chainpur (168 families), Seharbera (105 secured with the voluntary relocation of five households from Nargadih hamlet.
families) and Darda.
Village Name Area (acres) Priority
Balidih 13 P1
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest Nargadih 1 P1
department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent Rudia 15 P1
encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement. Darda 4.5 P2
180 181
5.06
DALMA - RUGAI
The Dalma-Rugai corridor connects Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary with the Rugai
Protected Forest (Jorai Pahar PF) of Seraikela Forest Division through private
lands. Elephants move from Rugai Protected Forest to Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary
through Ramgarh village, negotiating agriculture fields, stone crusher plants,
3D map showing the landscape of the Dalma - Rugai Corridor

fenced plots, heavy traffic on NH 33, and the Subarnarekha irrigation canal.
State Jharkhand
Connectivity Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and Rugai
Protected Forest
86° 8’ 57”- 86° 9’ 50” E
Legal status Patta Land
Major land use Agriculture fields and human
habitation
Major habitation/settlements Ramgarh
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous sal forest on
both side of the corridor
Frequency of usage by elephants Occassional
Corridor habitat status: The corridor comprises private agricultural lands and
NH 33. The forests of Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary are dominated by sal (Shorea
robusta). Other species include Buchanania lanzen, Anogeissus latifolia, Diospyros
melanoxylon, Terminalia tomentosa, Adina cordifolia, Madhuca latifolia, Embelica
officinalis etc.
182 183

Saraikela Forest Division: 30
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous sal forest on both sides of the corridor
Human habitation and agricultural fields: Ramgarh (Dangortoli, Rangatand and
Ramgarh hamlets)
River: Subarnarekha irrigation canal
Roadway: NH 33
Buildings/Artefacts: Dalma View Lodge and Restaurant, Stone crusher plants, high
tension power lines
Map of the Dalma - Rugai Corridor

Elephant Range: Central Landscape
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Highway: National Highway 33 connecting Jamshedpur and Ranchi passes
through the corridor. Vehicular traffic is high on the road around the clock. The
traffic intensity recorded was 469 vehicles per hour from 6 am to 6 pm, and 201
vehicles per hour from 6 pm to 6 am.
2. Irrigation canal: Subarnarekha irrigation canal passes through the corridor

between the foothills of Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and NH 33.
3. Human habitation: Three hamlets (Dangortoli, Rangatand and Ramgarh) of

Ramgarh village are located on the fringes of the corridor.
184 185
4. Stone crusher plants: Three stone crusher plants (one functional and two encroachment and developmental activities affecting elephant movement.
abandoned) are located inside the corridor, hindering elephant movement.
2. An overpass for vehicle movement needs to be constructed on NH 33 in the
5. Compound walls and fencing of plots in the corridor also hinder elephant corridor area, between Latitude 22°53’1.7”N / Longitude 86°09’ 20.0”E, and
movement. Latitude 22°53’ 1.20”N / Longitude 86°09’ 22.54”E. The overpass should be about
75 m before sloping down at both ends, so that elephants get a clear width to
6. Dalma View Restaurant, a Mahindra showroom and a factory are located in the move below it.
corridor along NH 33.
3. In consultation with local stakeholders, secure 31 acres of private lands along
Corridor dependent villages: Ramgarh (Rangatand, Rasikadih and Dangortoli), NH 33 and undertake habitat restoration in the secured land.
Kanderbera (226 families), Sahijharna, Jamdih.
4. No buildings, factories and other developmental activities should be permitted
This corridor has no forest connectivity and consists entirely of private lands, inside the corridor area.
largely under cultivation. Three hamlets (Dangortoli, Rangatand and Ramgarh) of
Ramgarh village are located on the fringes of the corridor. About 100 families are 5. Existing stone crushers, Dalma View Restaurant and the Mahindra showroom
living in these hamlets. The main livelihood of the villagers is daily wage labour should be shifted out of the corridor.
and agriculture. Villagers depend on the forest for fuelwood.
6. A suitable bridge has been constructed on Subernarekha canal in the corridor
Name of Hamlet Families and this will facilitate elephant movement.
Dangortoli 22
Rangatand 35 7. All fences and compound walls in the corridor should be removed in
Ramgarh 42 consultation with owners.
Darda 4.5
Human-Elephant Conflict: Cultivation of palatable crops in the corridor fringe

areas attracts elephants and results in crop raids. Human-elephant conflict is
high in the corridor area, especially during the paddy season.
CONSERVATION PLAN
186 187
5.07
DALMA - ASANBARI
Conservation Feasibility: High
This corridor connects Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary with the Asanbari Protected
Forest of Seraikela Forest Division. Elephant movement between Dalma Wildlife
Sanctuary and Seraikela Forest division takes place through the low hills between
3D map showing the landscape of the Dalma - Asanbari Corridor

the Kalibari Temple and Pardih village. High traffic on NH 33, which passes
through the corridor, is a major obstacle to animal movement.
State Jharkhand
Connectivity Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
Seraikela Forest Division
Length and Width 1 km and 0.28 - 0.45 km
86° 11’ 57”- 86° 12’ 44” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Protected
Forest
Major land use Forest and highway
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous sal forest on

both sides of the corridor
Corridor habitat status: The corridor comprises forest land on either side of
NH 33. The forest is dominated by sal (Shorea robusta). Other species include
Terminalia tomentosa, Madhuca indica, Emblica officinalis, Buchanania lanzen,
Anogeissus latifolia, Diospyros melanoxylon, Trewia nudiflora etc. The ground cover
is mostly grasses (Chrysopogon aciculatus, Heteropogon sp), along with Lantana sp.
188 189

Seraikela Forest Division: 30
Forest/Land use
Human habitation: Nil
Agriculture: Paddy
Roadway: National Highway 33 (Tatanagar-Chandil-Ranchi)
Buildings/Artefacts: A temple
Map of the Dalma - Asanbari Corridor

Elephant Range: Central Landscape
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. High traffic on NH 33 connecting Jamshedpur and Ranchi passes through the
corridor. Vehicular traffic remains high on the road around the clock. Traffic
intensity recorded was 469 vehicles per hour from 6am to 6pm, and 201 vehicles
per hour from 6pm to 6 am.
2. Encroachment and human habitation: There are small settlements on either

side of NH 33 near the Kalibari Temple. One village is Mirjadi. There are also a few
roadside dhabas (eateries) on the fringes of the corridor.
190 191
Corridor villages: Nil
Corridor dependent villages: Mirjadi, Phadalgora, Pardih, Goalpara
CONSERVATION PLAN
department under an appropriate law, and necessary action should be taken to
prevent activities detrimental to animal movement.
2. An overpass for vehicle movement needs to be constructed on NH 33 in the
Fig. 5.05: Elephant passing through the corridor

corridor area, to facilitate unhindered movement of elephants. This overpass
should be about 105 metres long before sloping down at both ends. It should be
constructed between 22°51’39.5”N, 86°12’7.5”E and 22°51’36.1”N, 86°12’7.9”E.
3. Construction of hotels and dhabas on either side of the road near the Kalibari
Temple should be prohibited and protection provided to the corridor forest on
either side of the road.
192 193
5.08
JHUNJHAKA – BANDUAN
This corridor connects the Pagda and Chimti forest blocks of Dalma Wildlife
Sanctuary in Jharkhand with the Banduan Range of Kangsawati South Division
in West Bengal. The corridor comprises fragmented forest patches with human
3D map showing the landscape of Jhunjhaka - Banduan Corridor

habitations and agriculture fields. Its usage by elephants has decreased in
recent years.
Alternate Name Dalma-Banduan, Jhilimilli

Banduan Range of Kangsawati
South Forest Division
86° 23’ 48”- 86° 26’ 17” E
Legal status Protected Forest, Patta Land
Major land use Forest, human settlements and
agriculture fields
Major habitation/settlements Jhunjuka, Rajabasa, Meghadaha
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional and seasonal
Corridor habitat status: The corridor forest is dominated by Shorea robusta.

Other species include Terminalia tomentosa, Madhuca indica, Anogeissus latifolia,
Diospyros melanoxylon, Buchanania lanzen etc. The corridor has reasonably good
forest cover but biotic pressure is slowly degrading the corridor forest.
194 195

Jamshedpur Forest Division: 14
Kangsawati South Division: 15-20
(Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012 and Elephant Census, West Bengal 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous
Human habitation: Rajabasa, Jhunjhka, Meghadaha, Burhigoda, Tungburu, Jorsia,
Sarkia, Gangamana
Agriculture: Paddy
Roadway: Village roads
Map of Jhunjhaka - Banduan Corridor

Elephant range: Central India
Elephant Reserve: Mayurjharna Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human habitation and agriculture fields: Rajabasa and Jhunjuka villages are
located in the corridor.
2. Encroachment: Encroachment of corridor forest by fringe villagers, for

settlements and agriculture, has further reduced the corridor’s width.
A total of eight villages are located between Jhunjhaka Protected Forest and
Banduan Reserve Forest along the state borders. They depend upon the corridor
forest for fuelwood and other forest produce. Agriculture is the main source of
livelihood for the locals.
196 197
Corridor villages: Rajabasa, Jhunjhuka
Corridor dependent villages: Meghadaha, Burhigoda, Tungburu, Jorsia, Sirka,

Gangamana
Human–Elephant Conflict: Human-elephant conflict is mainly in the form of crop

damage in the fringe villages. The villages most affected are Jorsia, Rajabasa and
Jhunjhka, as per secondary information from villagers.
CONSERVATION PLAN
the encroachment of corridor forests and developmental activities detrimental
to animal movement. Fig. 5.06: Large-scale agriculture in the corridor
2. Encroachments upon the corridor area need to be evicted.
3. The fragmented and degraded corridor forest needs restoration and

improvement.
4. Alternatives need to be sought for Jhunjhka and Rajabasa villages, which lie in
the path of a regular elephant movement route in the corridor.
Land identified to secure the corridor: In consultation with villagers, 67 acres of

land identified in Rajabasa and Jhunjhuka villages needs to be secured.
Fig. 5.07: A human settlement in the corridor
198 199
5.09
DALAPANI – KANKRAJHOR
This corridor connects Dalapani Reserve Forest of the Jamshedpur Forest Division,
Jharkhand, with the Kankrajhor Protected Forest of West Midnapur Forest Division
3D map showing the landscape of the Dalapani - Kankrajhor Corridor

in West Bengal. It thereby connects the elephant population of Dalma Wildlife
Sanctuary with that of West Midnapur Forest Division. Elephants move through
the hilly forest patches of Basadera Reserve Forest, as well as human habitations
and agriculture fields. The corridor has good forest cover presently, but an ever-
expanding human presence in the plains, with settlements and agriculture, is
affecting elephant movement.
Alternate Name Ghatsila-Kankrajhor

Kankrajhor Protected Forest
Length and Width 22-25 km and 0.55 – 2.5 km
86° 23’ 54”- 86° 36’ 5” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Patta Lands
Major land use Forest, human habitation and
agriculture fields
Major habitation/settlements Amlasol, Jambadi, Makoli, Dainmari,
Basadera, Mirigitanda
200 201
Corridor habitat status: The vegetation of the corridor forest is typically dry
deciduous, dominated by Shorea robusta. The corridor has good forest cover in
most parts and is continuous until Amlasol village along the interstate border of
Jharkhand and West Bengal.

West Midnapore Forest Division: 25-30
(Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012 and Elephant Census, West Bengal 2012)
Map of the Dalapani - Kankrajhor Corridor

Forest/Land use
Human habitation: Amlasol, Jambadi, Makoli, Dainmari, Basadera, Mirigitanda
Agriculture: Paddy
Buildings/Artefacts: Burudi Dam
Roadway: Village roads

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Encroachment of corridor forest: Villagers from fringe villages have encroached
upon corridor forest areas for agriculture and habitation.
202 203
2. Human habitation and agriculture: Around ten villages are located in and around
the corridor and their agricultural fields lie within the corridor.
3. Biotic pressure: Local people depend upon the corridor forest for their daily
needs – fuelwood, NTFP and cattle grazing, all of which affect habitat quality.
4. Roads: Village roads, especially the Ghatsila-Banduan road, pass through the
corridor.
Corridor villages: Amlasol, Jambadi, Makoli, Dainmari, Basadera, Mirigitanda.
Around ten villages are located in and around the corridor forest. People depend
upon agriculture and forest produce for their livelihood. Amlasol and Basadera lie
within the prime elephant movement areas of the corridor.
Corridor dependent villages: Ambjharana, Dumkakocha, Asanapani, Thurkadaha.

Fig. 5.08: The village of Mirigitanda is located within the corridor
Human–Elephant Conflict: Elephants mostly use this corridor during the

cropping season for migratory movement and to raid crops. Crop damage is a
major concern in the area.
CONSERVATION PLAN
the encroachment of corridor forests and developmental activities detrimental
to animal movement.
2. The forest department should strictly protect the corridor and prevent
further encroachments inside the corridor forest on either side of the Ghatsila-
Banduan road.
Fig. 5.09: A view of the corridor with agricultural land in between
204 205
5.10
DUMRIYA – NAYAGRAM
The Dumriya-Nayagram corridor connects the Dumriya Reserve Forest of

Mosabani Range with the Nayagram Reserve Forest of Chakuliya Range under
Jamshedpur Forest Division. National Highway 33, which connects Jharkhand with
3D map showing the landscape of the Dumriya - Nayagram Corridor

Odisha and West Bengal, bisects the corridor near Pitajuri village. In addition,
the Subarnarekha irrigation canal runs through the corridor in the foothills
of Dumriya Reserve Forest. Both linear infrastructural elements pose a major
hindrance to elephant movement.
Alternate Name Mosabani - Chakuliya

State Jharkhand
Connectivity Mosabani Range with Chakuliya
Range
Length and Width 6.5 km and 0-1 km
86° 32’ 52”- 86° 38’ 24” E

Major land use Forest, human habitation and
agriculture fields
Major habitation/settlements Chandanpur
Corridor habitat status: The vegetation of the corridor forest is dominated by

Shorea robusta. Other species include Terminalia tomentosa, Diospyros melanaxylon,
Buchanania lanzan, Anogeissus latifolia, Lagerstroemia parviflora, Adina cordifolia,
206 207
Pterocarpus marsupium, Terminalia chebula etc. The corridor forest has been
degraded and forest cover has greatly reduced.

Forest/Land use
Human habitation: Chandapur
Agriculture: Paddy
Roadway/Highway: National Highway 33
Artefacts: Subarnarekha irrigation canal
Map of the Dumriya - Nayagram Corridor

Railway: Railway track connecting Tatanagar and Kharagpur

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. National Highway: National Highway 33 passes through the corridor between
Nayagram and Pitajuri villages, fragmenting the corridor at Nayagram Reserve
Forest. The highway has high vehicular traffic around the clock as it connects
Jamshedpur with Odisha and West Bengal.
2.Irrigation canal: The Subarnarekha irrigation canal passes through the corridor
between the Subarnarekha River and Dumariya Reserve Forest near Bhakar and
208 209
Murgadih villages. The canal, with its cemented embankments, has fragmented 3. An animal-friendly overpass on the Subarnarekha canal will facilitate elephant
the corridor and obstructed elephant movement between Nayagarh and Dumriya movement between Dumriya and Nayagram Reserve Forests.
Reserve Forests.
4. Brick kilns near Chandanpur on the Subarnarekha river bank should be closed.
3. Brick kilns are located along the bank of Subarnarekha River near Chandapur
village, hindering elephant movement. 5. Habitat restoration of degraded corridor areas is required.
4. Railway track: The track connecting Tatanagar and Kharagpur passes through
the Nayagram Reserve Forest near Rajabasha village and affects the corridor
usage by elephants.
5. Biotic pressure: The dependence of villagers from fringe villages upon the
corridor forest for fuelwood, NTFP and other daily needs has affected the habitat
quality of the corridor forest.
Corridor villages: Only one village, Chandanpur, with 85-95 families is located
in the corridor. The village is situated along the bank of the Subarnarekha River.
Corridor dependent villages: Murgadih, Gariyas, Pitajuri, Nayagram, Bhakar,

Jhariya, Sagadih, Jamua, Machadih and Rajabasa.
Human–Elephant Conflict: Conflict occurs mainly due to crop damage by

elephants during their seasonal movement.
CONSERVATION PLAN
non-forestry and developmental activities detrimental to the corridor. Fig. 5.10: Brick kilns located near Chandanpur village on the Subarnarekha river bank
2. Traffic on NH 33 needs to be regulated and the speed limit enforced through

the use of suitable physical barriers in the corridor area.
210 211
5.11
RAIBERA - PULBABURU
This corridor connects the Raibera Protected Forest of Kolhan Forest Division
with Pulbaburu Protected Forest of Porahat Forest Division. Forest cover has
3D map showing the landscape of the Raibera - Pulbaburu Corridor

been fragmented due to a railway track connecting Goilkera and Manoharpur,
and the expansion of agriculture in Raibera and Koinena villages.
Alternate Name Leda-Bera

State Jharkhand
Connectivity Raibera Protected Forest of Kolhan
Forest Division with Pulbaburu
Protected Forest of Porahat Forest
Division
85° 13’ 4”- 85° 18’ 56” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Patta Lands
Major land use Forests, agriculture fields,
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Raibera and Koinena
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous and sal
forest
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation in the corridor area is dominated by Shorea

robusta, with degraded forest patches.
212 213

Porahat Forest Division: 3-5
Kolhan Forest Division: 8
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous and sal forest
Human habitation: Raibera and Koinena
Agriculture: Paddy
Railway: Goilkera-Manoharpur
River: Karo
Map of the Raibera - Pulbaburu Corridor

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Railway track: The railway track connecting Goilkera and Manoharpur passes
through the corridor. More than 40 trains ply on this track every day, making it a
significant threat to elephants passing through the corridor. The railway network
here is being expanded, which will further affect elephant movement.
2. Agricultural expansion: The expansion of agricultural fields has reduced the

corridor width and is fragmenting the corridor forest.
3. Biotic pressure: Inhabitants of fringe villages are dependent upon the corridor
forest for fuelwood and NTFP, and for livestock grazing. This has degraded
the habitat.
214 215
Corridor villages: Raibera (32 families) and Koinena (about 100 families) are two
villages located in and around the corridor on the regular elephant movement
route. People are mostly farmers and sell fuelwood at Derawan Railway Station
(fulewood is also transported to Rourkela and Chakradharpur).
Corridor dependent villages: Panta, Dugnia, Derawan, (about 100 familes),

Mukundpur (120 familes), and Taraisol.
Human–Elephant Conflict: Nine elephants died due to train-hits in this stretch

between 1994 and 2015. No human casualties have occurred in the corridor
fringe villages, though crop and property damage is quite significant, especially in
Raibera and Koinena.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Fig. 5.11: Elephant movement data being recorded from a group of villagers
developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
2. Train speeds within the corridor area need to be regulated, especially during
the night.
3. Improve enforcement to prevent extraction of wood from the forest. Undertake

restoration of the corridor forest.
Fig. 5.12: The railway line that passes through the corridor (photo taken from locomotive engine)
216 217
5.12
ANKUA - AMBIA
The Ankua-Ambia corridor connects Ankua Reserve Forest of Saranda

Forest Division with Ambia Reserve Forest of Kolhan Forest Division. Recent
encroachments and the expansion of agriculture lands along the Koina River and
3D map showing the landscape of the Ankua - Ambia Corridor

the Manoharur-Chotanagar road (about 1-3 km from Kamarbera village) within
the last decade has disconnected the corridor forest, severely hindering elephant
movement. Iron ore mines located in Ankua Reserve Forest to the south of the
corridor have affected elephant habitat and could lead to fragmentation in future.
State Jharkhand
Connectivity Ankua Reserve Forest (Saranda
Forest Division) with Ambia Reserve
Forest (Kolhan Forest Division)
Length and Width 1 km and 2.5-3 km
85° 15’ 1”- 85° 17’ 26” E
Major land use Forests, agriculture fields
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular, throughout the year (Oct-
Feb and Apr-June)
Corridor habitat status: The corridor forest is dominated by sal (Shorea robusta).
Other species include Anogeissus latifolia, Boswellia serrata, Wendlandia tinctoria,
218 219
Gardenia sp, Phoenix acaulis, Eulaliopsis binata, Dillenia pentagyna and Zizyphus
xylopyrus etc.

Kolhan Forest Division: 08
Saranda Forest Division: 154
Forest/Land use
Agriculture: Paddy
Roadway: Manoharpur-Chotanagra PWD Road
River: Koina River
Map of the Ankua - Ambia Corridor

Mountain Range: Saranda Hills
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Encroachment: Within the last decade, about 340 acres of corridor forest have
been encroached upon by villagers from fringe villages (Kamarbera, Soda and
Patherbasa).There is a possibility of more encroachment being undertaken with
the intention of getting more patta land under the Forest Rights Act.
2. Iron ore mines in Ankua Reserve Forest have affected elephant movement.
3. Heavy vehicle movement on the Manoharpur-Chotanagra PWD road has

hindered elephant movement.
4. Collection of NTFP and fuelwood for commercial purposes by the people of fringe
villages has degraded the corridor forest.
220 221
The villagers of Kamarbera, Soda and Patherbasa have encroached upon about
340 acres of corridor forest in the last decade by. Of this, they have recieved patta
for about 50 acres of land as per the Forest Rights Act. The encroachers have
undertaken agriculture after clearing the corridor forest. They are also collecting
NTFP and fuelwood from the corridor for domestic and commercial purposes. No
human habitations have been established on corridor lands thus far.
Corridor dependent villages: Kamerbera, Timra and Soda.
Human–Elephant Conflict: Land use has changed drastically in the corridor

area over the last ten years or so. Tribal communities are undertaking shifting
cultivation on the elephant path inside the corridor. Cultivation of paddy in
corridor fringe areas attracts elephants, who regularly use the corridor and raid
Fig. 5.13: Forest cover in the corridor area

crops.
CONSERVATION PLAN
department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent the
encroachment of corridor forest and developmental activities affecting animal
movement.
2. The approximately 290 acres of corridor land encroached upon by villagers of

Kamarbera, Soda and Patherbasa should not be considered for patta under the
Forest Rights Act. These lands should be made free of encroachment.
3. In consultation with villagers, about 50 acres of patta land in Patherbasa village

need to be secured.
4. No more new mines should be allowed in the Ankua and Ambia Reserve
Forests.
5. Habitat restruction of corridor area made free of encroachment.
222 223
5.13
ANJADBERA - BICHABURU
This corridor connects the Bichaburu Protected Forest of Chaibasa Forest Division
with the Anjadbera Protected Forest of Saranda Forest Division. Elephants move
3D map showing the landscape of the Anjadbera - Bichaburu Corridor

between both habitats through narrow and fragmented forest patches, a railway
track, National Highway 75, human habitations and agricultural lands.
State Jharkhand
Connectivity Bichaburu PF with Anjadbera PF
85° 40’ 54”- 85° 50’ 47” E
Major land use Forests, agricultural land and
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Kudapi, Bada Nurda, Pungsia
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular and seasonal (Oct-Feb)
Corridor habitat status: The corridor forest is degraded and dominated by sal
(Shorea robusta). Other major species include Buchanania lanzan, Terminalia
tomentosa, Madhuca indica, Schleicher aoleosa, Dalbergia paniculata, Pterocarpus
marsupium etc. Signs of wood cutting and lopping were found on almost 30% of
the trees in the surveyed area.
224 225

Chaibasa Forest Division: 38
Forest/Land use
Human habitation and agriculture fields: Kudapi, Bada Nurda, Pungsia
Roadway: National Highway 75 (Chaibasa-Jaintgarh)
Railway: Railway track (Chaibasa-Noamundi)
Buildings/Artefacts: High-voltage transmission line
Map of the Anjadbera - Bichaburu Corridor

Mountain Range: Saranda Hills, Chotanagpur Plateau
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. National Highway: NH 75 passes through the corridor. Vehicular traffic was
recorded at 137 vehicles per hour between 6 am and 6 pm, and 55 vehicles
per hour between 6 pm and 6 am. Elephants cross the highway north of Haat
Gamhariya.
2. A railway track connecting Chaibasa and Noamundi passes through the corridor
near Kudapi village. On average 90 trains pass through this corridor every day, of
which 43 trains run from 6 pm to 6 am, hindering elephant movement.
3. Steep embankments along the railway track inside the Bichaburu Protected
Forest allow elephants to cross only near Kudapi village in the corridor.
226 227
4. Human habitation and agriculture fields: More than ten villages/hamlets are
located in and around the corridor forest. Of these, Kudapi, Pungsia and Bada
Nurda mostly hinder elephant movement. The agricultural lands of Kudapi village
completely disconnect the corridor.
Corridor villages: Kudapi, Bada Nurda, Pungsia. The people from Kudapi (30
families), Bada Nurda (350 families) and Pungsia villages are the major stakeholders
Fig. 5.14: An elephant on the fringes of the forest in the Anjadbera - Bichaburu Corridor
in this corridor. Most of the people are farmers and daily wage labourers and are
dependent on the corridor forest for fuelwood, timber and NTFP.
Corridor dependent villages: Chhota Illigara, Rangabasa, Saparamguttu, Banguttu,

Paramsahi.
Human–Elephant Conflict: High in both forest divisions. Some 28 human deaths,

16 cases of human injury and six elephant deaths were reported between 2002
and 2013 in Chaibasa Forest Division. More than 15 cases of human injury and
two human deaths were reported during the same period in Saranda Forest
Division.
CONSERVATION PLAN
developmental activities that hinder animal movement.
2. In consultation with villagers, 30 acres of agricultural land needs to be secured

in Kudapi village.
3. Vehicle speeds on NH 75 need to be restricted through physical barriers during

peak elephant movement hours.
4. The frequency of trains is very high. This has to be regulated at night and the
speed of trains reduced in the corridor area.
228 229
5.14
Karo - Karampada
This corridor connects the Karo and Sidhamatha Reserve Forests of Keonjhar
Forest Division in Odisha with the Karampada Reserve Forest of Saranda Forest
3D map showing the landscape ofthe Karo-Karampada Corridor

Division in Jharkhand. The terrain is hilly and dominated by mines. Currently,
elephant movement occurs between the Karo and Karampada Reserve Forests
via Panduliposi and Haramotto-Kolhapunduli-Jhandiburu-Nawagaon-Karampada.
Elephant movement has also been reported near Kiriburu Hill Top and the Arjun
Ladha mine near Jhirina nullah. The foothills of Karo Reserve Forest are ideal for
elephant movement and if a part of the SAIL mining area is left for the corridor
and restored, there is a possibility that elephants can use the foothills to move
between Karo and Karampada Reserve Forests.
State Odisha and Jharkhand

Connectivity Karo and Sidhamatha Reserve
Forest in Odisha with Karampada
Reserve Forest in Jharkhand
Length and Width 8.4-19 km and 0-1.8 km
85° 14’ 4”- 85° 20’ 45” E
Major land use Forest, mines and human
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Haramotto, Kolhapunduli, Bangaon,
Nawagaon, Karampada
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular and seasonal (Sep-Dec)
230 231
Corridor habitat status: A total of 23 plant species were found in the sampled
area of 0.16 ha. Of these, seven species were palatable to elephants. The
maximum frequency found was of Shorea robusta (42), followed by Anogeissus
latifolia (11), Terminalia tomentosa (10), Diospyros melanoxylon (10) and Symplocos
racemosa (4). Maximum average GBH was found in Lannea coromandalica (168
cm), Buchanania lanzan (97 cm), Pterocarpus marsupium (92 cm), Ailanthus excelsa
(89 cm) and Shorea robusta (71.84 cm). Maximum average height was found in
Map of the Karo-Karampada Corridor area showing the land to be secured

Lannea coromandalica (16.76 m), followed by Shorea robusta (14.61 m), Terminalia
bellirica (13.34 m), Ailanthus excelsa (12.8 m) and Syzygium cumini (12.8 m). Signs
of wood cutting and lopping were high, indicating severe pressure on the habitat.
Lantana camara had invaded the corridor forming large expanses of open areas.
The proportion of ground cover included barren ground (71.25%), shrubs

(24.06%), herbs (2.81%) and grasses (1.88%).

Keonjhar Forest Division: 47
The elephant population in the Barbil Forest Range of Keonjhar Forest Division
decreased from 38 individuals in 2002-03 to only six individuals in 2011-12.
(Elephant Census, Odisha, 2015 and Elephant Census, Jharkhand 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest types: Tropical dry deciduous forest
Mines: Bolani mine (Steel Authority of India Ltd) and Arjun Ladha mine
Buildings/Artefacts: Factories and industral units
Human settlements: Haramotto, Kolhapunduli, Bangaon, Nawagaon, Karampada

Mountain Range: Parts of Garhjat Hills
Elephant Reserve: Baitarani Elephant Reserve; Singhbhum Elephant Reserve
232 233
HUMAN DIMENSIONS CONSERVATION PLAN
Threats 1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and legally
1. Mines: SAIL’s Bolani mine and the Arjun Ladha mine located between Kiriburu protected under an appropriate law. Action should be taken to prevent illegal
town and Haramotto village have totally blocked elephant movement through mining and construction, and the diversion of forest land for non-forestry and
the foothills. developmental activities within the corridor area.
2. Beneficiation plant in Haramotto: The construction of a beneficiation plant in
Haramotto village located in the prime elephant movement area has hindered 2. To bridge the framented area of the corridor, 373 acres of the SAIL Bolani
elephant movement and could severely hamper such movement in the future. mining area needs to be secured and restored.
3. Human settlements: Biotic pressure (extraction of fuelwood, sal leaves etc)
from Haramotto, Kolhapunduli, Base Camp, Kiriburu Hill Top, Kiriburu Town, 3. Private lands (69 acres) in Karampada and Nawagaon need to be secured in
Nawagaon, Bhangaon and Karampada, all situated in and around the corridor, consultation with villagers.
has affected the corridor forest and elephant movement.
4. The lease to the Arjun Ladha mine which is located very close to the corridor
Corridor villages: A total of five villages are located in and around the corridor. should be cancelled to maintain unhindered elephant movement. Coal should
Of these, Haramotto and Kolhapunduli lie in the prime elephant movement area be transferred by conveyor belt instead of vehicles to minimise disturbance.
and were considered for a detailed survey. Wildlife Trust of India surveyed a total
of 15 families across these villages; all surveyed households have agricultural 5. The construction of the beneficiation plant in Haramotto village should be
land but more than 80% of them have left it fallow. Employment in nearby mines stopped.
and factories leads to less cultivation in Haramotto. Villagers of Kolhapunduli
depend on cultivation and also on daily wage labour. 6. No mining should be allowed between Jhandiburu and Kiriburu mines.
Corridor dependent villages: Haramotto, Kolhapunduli, Kiriburu Hill Top, Kiriburu 7. Habitat restoration of degraded and mined area in the corridor is required.
Township, Bangaon, Nawagaon, Karampada.
Land identified to secure the corridor
Human-Elephant Conflict: Three elephant deaths were reported in the Barbil An area of 441.9 acres (mines and private land) has been identified for the
Forest Range of Keonjhar Forest Division due to conflict between 2008-09 and securement of the corridor.
2011-12. Five human deaths and two cases of human injury were also reported Area in acres Priority
from Barbil Forest Range between 2007-08 and 2011-12. Further, villagers
SAIL Bolani Mines 373 P1
reported that elephant attacks had claimed four human lives in Kolhapunduli
Karampada 42.9 P2
village in the last decade. None of these cases were registered by the forest
Nawagaon 26 P2
department and the victim’s families did not receive any ex-gratia support. Crop
damage by elephants has been decreasing over the years as a result of less
cultivation as well as a reduction in elephant movement.
234 235
5.15
Badampahar - Dhobadhobin
This corridor connects Badampahar Reserve Forest of Odisha with Dhobadhobin
3D map showing the landscape of the Badampahar - Dhobadhobin Corridor

Reserve Forest of Jharkhand, leading on to Haldipokhari Reserve Forest of
Chaibasa. The corridor comprises fragmented forest patches of the Budhipat
Demarcated Protected Forest and Basila Reserve Forest, as well as agriculture
fields and human settlements that maintain connectivity between Similipal Tiger
Reserve and South Chaibasa.

Connectivity Mayurbhanj Elephant Reserve
(Odisha) and Chaibasa (Jharkhand)
Length and Width 11 km and 0-1km
85° 59’ 1”- 86° 1’ 56” E
Legal status Demarcated Protected Forest (DPF),
Village Forest and Patta Lands
Major land use Forest, agriculture land and human
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Jhatisiring, Basaghutu, Tungurusahi,
Batisahi, Thuntipani
Frequency of usage by elephants Occassional; bulls and small herds
Corridor habitat status: A total of 18 plant species were found in sampled area
of 0.16 ha. Of these, eight species are elephant food species. The maximum
236 237
frequency recorded was of Shorea robusta (127), followed by Buchanania lanzan

(11), Terminalia tomentosa (7) and Madhuca indica (6). Maximum average GBH
was found in Terminalia bellirica (120 cm), followed by Schleicher aoleosa (76 cm),
Dalbergia paniculata (50 cm) and Pterocarpus marsupium (38 cm). Maximum
average height was found in Terminalia bellirica and Schleichera oleosa (10.67 m),
followed by Dalbergia paniculata (9.14 m) and Shorea robusta (8.24 m). Signs of both
wood cutting and lopping were found in 46% of the total plants in the sampled
areas, indicating that the corridor vegetation is under immense pressure.
The ground cover result shows a higher percentage of barren ground (42%),
followed by shrubs (36%), grasses (17%) and herbs (5%).
Map of the Badampahar - Dhobadhobin Corridor

Karanjia Forest Division: 56
Rairangpur Forest Division: 48
Similipal Tiger Reserve Core: 337
Chaibasa South Forest Division: 38
(Elephant Census Odisha, 2015, and Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Human settlements: Jhatisiring, Basaghutu, Tungurusahi, Ramasahi, Mandam
Agriculture land
Road: State Highway 49 and Neunti-Jhaldunguri village road
Artefacts: Power lines

Nearest Protected Area: Similipal Tiger Reserve
Elephant Reserve: Mayurbhanj Elephant Reserve
Nearest Tiger Reserve: Similipal Tiger Reserve
Biosphere Reserve: Similipal Biosphere Reserve
238 239
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Human–Elephant conflict: Expansion of agriculture fields in the corridor has
resulted in the fragmentation of the corridor forest and subsequently increased
Threats the trend of crop damage by elephants. Crop damage and shared habitats are
1. Fragmentation: Expansion of human settlements within and on the fringes of the main sources of conflict between humans and elephant in this area.
the corridor, agriculture fields, roads (Neunti-Jhaldunguri) etc have fragmented
the corridor between Basila Reserve Forest and Budhipat DPF. The official records of human-elephant conflict for Rairangpur and Karanjia
2. Expansion of settlements: Expansion of Basaghtu village and a weekly market Forest Divisions shows 23 human deaths, 13 human injuries and 12 elephant
along the Neunti-Jhaldunguri road passing through the corridor hinders elephant deaths between 2002-03 and 2012-13. More than 70% of villagers reported
movement. an increased intensity of conflict and attributed it to an increased elephant
3. Biotic pressure: Villagers collect fuelwood, timber, Shorea robusta leaves and population, followed by loss of forest area, increase in human settlements and
other NTFP, and graze their livestock. This has deteriorated the corridor forest. change in elephant behaviour.
4. Highway: SH 49 connecting Jashipur and Rairangpur passes through the
corridor, fragmenting Budhipat DPF and Badampahar Reserve Forest. The
CONSERVATION PLAN
average vehicle movement on the highway was found to be 70.17 vehicles per
hour. The average vehicle movement was found high for two-wheelers (30.67)
1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and legally
followed by four-wheelers (25.6), heavy vehicles (7.85) and six-wheelers (6.04).
protected under an appropriate law. Action should be taken to prevent
5. Mines: Mining activities (iron ore and china clay) in the Badampahar Reserve
encroachment of forest land, illicit felling of trees and developmental activities
Forest affect elephant movement in the corridor.
detrimental to the corridor.
6. Encroachment: Encroachment of the corridor forest in Budhipat DPF and Basila
2. In consultation with villagers, identified lands (230 acres) in Basaghutu,
Reserve Forest for agriculture and the establishment of settlements has further
Tungurusahi, Ramasahi and Mandam villages need to be secured.
fragmented the corridor forest and reduced corridor width.
3. Prevent expansion of human settlements and encroachment along the Neunti-
Jhaldunguri road, which would further obstruct the corridor.
Corridor dependent villages: Jhatisiring, Thuntipani, Badahatnabeda, Basaghutu,
4. Undertake the restoration of degraded corridor forest in Budhipat DPF and
Tungurusahi, Batisahi, Gobardhansahi, Kodaldhua, Jharbeda, Sagarsahi, Balanposi,
Basila Reserve Forest.
Bhagabandi, Ramasahi, Genteisahi, Neunti, Nawana, Pahadpur and Mandam. A
total of 18 villages are located in and around the corridor. Of these, 79 households
Land identified to secure the corridor: The corridor has been fragmented between
in five villages (Thuntipani, Basaghutu, Batisahi, Jhatisiring and Tungurusahi) were
Budhipat DPF and Basila Reserve Forest. The fragmentation occurs due to agricultural
surveyed. More than 90% of the sampled households reported agriculture as
lands, the Neunti-Jhaldunguri road and human settlements, i.e. Tungurusahi and
their principal livelihood. Villagers depend on the corridor forest for collection of
Basaghutu. To maintain connectivity, land from the following villages needs to be
fuelwood and wood for construction, agricultural purposes, livestock grazing and
secured with the due consent of villagers: Basaghutu and Tungursahi: 170 acres;
fodder, medicinal plants, Shorea robusta leaves and other NTFP.
Tungursahi: 11 acres; Ramasahi: 19 acres; Mandam: 30 acres.
240 241
5.16
Badampahar - Karida East
This corridor connects Badampahar Reserve Forest of Odisha with Karida

East Reserve Forest of Jharkhand, thereby maintaining elephant movement
3D map showing the landscape of the Badampahar - Karida East Corridor

between Similipal Tiger Reserve, Odisha and the Mosabani Range of Jamshedpur
Forest Division, Jharkhand. From Similipal the elephants pass through Dhusara
Reserve Forest, Teltangia Village Forest, Dhinkia Demarcated Protected Forest
(DPF), Pidhakata and Tunguru Reserve Forest. Elephant movement has greatly
reduced between Badampahar and Dhusura Reserve Forests due to mining in
Badampahar Reserve Forest, Sulaipat Dam and Suliapat irrigation canal. Similarly,
elephant movement between Dhinkia DPF and Dhusura Reserve Forest has
markedly reduced due to human settlements, agriculture fields, construction of
irrigation canals and the presence of an electric sub-station.

Connectivity Similipal Tiger Reserve of Odisha
and Jamshedpur Forest Division of
Jharkhand
Length and Width 34.5 km and 0-1.5 km
86° 9’ 10”-86° 26’ 16” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Patta Land,
Revenue Land
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Damabeda, Kuajhari, Jederghutu,
Bijatala
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional; bulls and small herds
242 243
area of 0.20 ha. Of these, seven were elephant food species. The maximum
frequency recorded was of Shorea robusta (101), followed by Cleistanthus
collinus (40), Buchanania lanzan (28), Diospyros melanoxylon (21) and Terminalia
tomentosa (19). Maximum average GBH was found in Neuri (vernacular name; 70
cm) followed by Shorea robusta (55.15 cm), Syzygium cumini (49 cm), Cleistanthus
collinus (34.68 cm) and Teminalia tomentosa (34 cm). Maximum average height
was found in Neuri (16.76 m) followed by Shorea robusta (13.29 m), Hollarhena
antidysenterica (9.14 m), Cleistanthus collinus (7.96 m), Maduca indica (7.37 m).
Signs of woodcutting and lopping were found in 14.1% of the total plants in the
Map of the Badampahar - Karida East Corridor

sampled area, especially Shorea robusta, Terminalia tomentosa, Buchanania lanzan
and Diospyros melanoxylon. Elephant fodder species were found with wood
cutting and lopping signs.
The ground cover had the highest percentage of barren ground (57.5%), followed
by shrubs (26%), grasses (11.5%) and herbs (5%).

Rairangpur Forest Division: 48
(Elephant Census Odisha, 2015, and Elephant Census Jharkhand, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Rivers / Riverway: Khadakei and Bankabal Rivers, irrigation canals
Roadway: State Highway 50 connecting Baripada and Rairangpur
Human settlements: Damabeda, Kuajhari, Jederghutu, Bijatala
Building/Artefacts: Sulaipat and Bankabal Dam, Mines, Electric sub-station
244 245
Other ecological importance exerted by fringe villages (grazing, fuelwood and NTFP extraction) of fringe villages
Mountain Range: Parts of Garhjat Hills has further degraded the corridor forest.
Nearest Protected Area: Similipal Wildlife Sanctuary and Similipal National Park 6. Cultivation in Lakhanchhatar and nearby areas has reduced and degraded the
Elephant Reserve: Mayurbhanj Elephant Reserve corridor forest.
Tiger Reserve: Similipal Tiger Reserve
Biosphere Reserve: Similipal Biosphere Reserve A total of 64 villages are located in and around the corridor. Of these, 46 families
in three villages (Jederghutu, Kuajhari and Damabeda) were surveyed. All the
respondents depend upon agriculture for their livelihood, and some work as
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
labourers to augment their income. More than 90% of the sampled households
depend upon the corridor forest for fuelwood. Villagers also collect Shorea robusta
Threats
leaves, other NTFP and medicinal plants. Farmers mainly cultivate paddy once a
1. Irrigation canals: The cemented surface of the irrigation canals running on
year, hence crop depredation by elephants occurs seasonally. All respondents
either side of State Highway 50 and Sulaipat canal are major obstacles to elephant
reported human-elephant conflict.
movement through the corridor.
Corridor dependent villages: Chauradihi, Dudhijharan, Bhuyanbasha, Netrajharan,

2. Mines in Badampahar Reserve Forest: Iron ore mines in the Badampahar Reserve
Talapokhari, Bhuyanbasha, Ghudurupala, Tiakati, Sarupali, Jagannathpur,
Forest and corresponding activities like blasting and heavy vehicular movement
Badapurunapani, Badajodi, Saragada, Chaturisahi, Patharakata, Gunduria,
have severely affected elephant movement.
Jamajhari, Pitajhari, Khandadera, Karanjharan, Burudihi, Asansikha, Balikatha,
Taldiha, Karkachia, Khadiasar, Bhalkichua, Jadapokhari, Hatnabeda, Tulasibani,
3. Highway traffic: SH 50 connecting Baripada and Rairangpur passes through
Teltangia, Damabeda, Bijatala, Jederghutu, Karanjei, Kuajhari, Banki, Paunsia,
the corridor. On average, 79.5 vehicles per hour were found to ply through the
Kunjakachu, Gargadihi, Bantuligada, Edelbeda, Bandgaun, Kendua, Nuagaon,
corridor. Average vehicle movement was found high for two-wheelers (38.96)
Sapghara, Baliam, Sargada, Sanabantha, Badabantha, Baduakacha, Saranda,
followed by four-wheelers (30.88), six-wheelers (7.92) and heavy vehicles (1.75).
Tunguru, Kalatamak, Jhumukapahari, Hatisala, Heselgoda, Lado, Daleidihi,
Between 10 pm and 7 pm the average vehicle movement was 23 per hour.
Budamara, Dhantangar, Tiakati, Lakhanchhatar and Rangamatia.
4. Electric sub-station: The construction of an electric sub-station is in progress in

Human-Elephant Conflict: Crop damage is the major source of conflict in
the corridor near the Bankabal River.
and around the corridor. High levels of conflict are reported in the villages of
Jederghutu, Kuajhari and Karanjei, which are situated close to the forest. Five
5. Human settlements and biotic pressure: The settlements and agricultural lands
elephant deaths (due to conflict and unknown reasons) were reported in
of Damabeda, Bijatala, Kuajhari and Jederghutu villages have fragmented the
Rairangpur Forest Division between 2002-03 and 2012-13. Five human deaths /
corridor between Dhusura Reserve Forest and Dhinkia DPF. The biotic pressure
cases of human injury due to elephant attacks were reported in the same period.
246 247
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department under
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent mining activities,
encroachment of forest land, illicit felling, slash-and-burn cultivation and
developmental activities detrimental to the corridor.
2. Overpasses are needed at regular intervals on the cemented surface of the

irrigation canals to facilitate elephant movement in the corridor area.
3. The electric sub-station should be shifted out of the corridor.
4. Prohibit mining activities in and around the Badampahar Reserve Forest.
5. Secure private lands under Bijatala, Damabeda, Kuajhari, Karanjei and

Fig. 5.15: Commerical extraction of Shorea robusta leaves from the corridor and nearby forest
Jederghutu villages, between Dhinkia DPF and Dhusara Reserve Forest.
6. Prevent the expansion of human settlements along the highway near the
Bijatala chowk and hamlet of Kuajhari village.
7. Restore the fragmented and degraded Dhusara Reserve Forest and forest
cover between Kalatamak and Jhumukapahari villages to maintain connectivity
between Tunguru Reserve Forest and Sarli Reserve Forest.
8. Prevent sagging of the electric transmission line (it should be maintained at

20 feet or 6.6 m above the ground) passing through the corridor forest from the
sub-station.
Land identified to secure the corridor: The corridor is surrounded by villages and
large private lands present between and around the forest patches. Potential
sites have been identified in Kuajhari, Karanjei, Jederghutu, Damabeda and
Bhitaramda villages to secure the corridor.
Fig. 5.16: A field officer undertaking habitat assessment
248 249
5.17
SIMiliPAL - Satkosia
This corridor connects Similipal Tiger Reserve and Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary
through the Noto and Satkosia Reserve Forests. Local people from the Bhaliadala
3D map showing the landscape of the Similipal - Satkosia Corridor

Gram Panchayat have encroached upon the corridor forest for agriculture and
habitation, causing fragmentation. The corridor is used by several other wildlife
species including tigers (Panthera tigris) and sloth bears (Melursus ursinus).
Alternate Name Similipal - Hadgarh

State Odisha
Connectivity Similipal Tiger Reserve and Hadgarh
Wildlife Sanctuary
86° 12' 60"- 86° 15' 28" E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Tiger Reserve and
Revenue Land
Major land use Forest, private lands, encroachment
areas and human settlements
Major habitation/settlements Kumbhalar, Bhaliadiha, Baigananali,
Bennuadhar, Asurkhal, Noto
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular and seasonal
area of 0.16 ha. Of these, 10 were elephant food species.
250 251
The maximum frequency found was of Shorea robusta (101), followed by

Terminalia tomentosa (14), Glochidion lanceolarium (10), Syzygium cumini (10) and
Cleistanthus collinus (7). Maximum average GBH was found in Albizia lebbeck (101
cm), followed by Madhuca indica (95.5 cm), Garuga pinnata (94.5 cm), Terminalia
tomentosa (88.17 cm) and Anogeissus latifolia (84.33 cm). Maximum average height
was found in Albizia lebbeck (19.81 m), followed by Anogeissus latifolia (15.24 m),
Garuga pinnata (13.41 m), Terminalia tomentosa (12.93 m) and Madhuca indica
(10.67 m). Signs of both wood cutting and lopping were found in 49.75% of the
total plants in the sampled areas. Shorea robusta was found with considerable
signs of lopping and cutting. The ground cover was found to mostly be barren
ground (58.12%), followed by shrubs (30.63%), herbs (5.94%) and grasses (5.31%).
Map of the Similipal - Satkosia Corridor

Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary: 45
Baripada Forest Division: 68
(Elephant Census Odisha, 2015)
Forest/Land use
Agriculture fields
Human habitations: Kumbhalar, Bhaliadiha, Baigananali, Bennuadhar, Asurkhal
and Noto
Road: Thakurmunda-Udala road

Elephant Range: East Central India
Protected Areas: Similipal Wildlife Sanctuary, Similipal National Park and Hadgarh
Wildlife Sanctuary
Tiger Reserve: Similipal Tiger Reserve
Biosphere Reseve: Similipal Biosphere Reserve
252 253
HUMAN DIMENSIONS elephant movement areas in the corridor. Agriculture is the primary livelihood of
the respondents (87%). Villagers also sell Shorea robusta leaves and other forest
Threats produce for their livelihood and are engaged in daily wage labour. They also
1. Encroachment of corridor forest: Tribal migrants have come and settled in the depend upon the corridor forest for their daily needs, including fuelwood, wood
area by clearing the corridor forest, in anticipation of receiving patta land under for construction, and the extracton of mahula, kendu, kusuma, chara, siali, bhalia,
the Forest Rights Act. karanja, jamun, rai flower, wild vegetables and mushrooms.
2. Road: The road connecting Thakurmunda and Udala passes through the
corridor. The side wall along the road hinders animal movement. Traffic intensity Human–Elephant Conflict: In 2010-11, one elephant death occurred due to
is low at present. conflict in the Thakurmunda range of Karanjia Forest Division. No human deaths
3. Proposed road: The construction of a Major District Road (MDR 70) is proposed have occurred in the corridor area although two people were injured in elephant
through Similipal via Dongadiha village, connecting Thakurmunda and Udala. This attacks in the Satkosia and Thakurmunda Forest Ranges of Karanjia Forest
will endanger the movement of elephants. Division. Crop depredation and property damage has been reported in the
4. Anthropogenic pressure: Local people depend upon the corridor forest for timber corridor fringe villages.
as well as the collection of Shorea robusta leaves and other NTFP, for subsistence
as well as commercial purposes. This affects the health of the corridor vegetation.
CONSERVATION PLAN
5. Forest Fires: Forest fires occur every year. Locals set fires to collect Madhuca
indica flowers.
department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent the
Corridor villages: Chandanjharana, Benuadhara, Baigananali and Kumbhalar.
encroachment of corridor forest, illegal tree felling and developmental activities
hindering elephant movement.
Corridor dependent villages: Masaghati, Satbedi, Jajapur, Dhinkisal, Jamnda,
2. In consultation with villagers, the corridor forest needs to be secured by
Baghdapa, Purunapani, Kudisila, Kumbhalar, Jambani, Bhaliadiha, Baigananali,
relocating people from Benuadhar, Baigananali, Kumbhalar and Chandanjharan
Bennuadhar, Jharajhari, Asurkhal, Chandanjharana (a hamlet of Asurkhal),
villages, which are located inside the corridor.
Ghantiadhara, Panaposi, Banamunda, Mulapala, Baghuanala, Jadipada, Bhejidiha,
3. The proposed expansion of Major District Road 70 should be halted or
Karanjagada, Noto, Purunapani, Bhurguda, Khatuapada, Askoti, Dhanchaturi,
appropriate mitigation measures planned.
Sandei, Patrapada, Khukund, Dongadiha.
4. Collection of Shorea robusta leaves and other NTFP should be regulated from
the corridor forest and eco-development support be provided to the villagers.
A total of 34 villages are located in and around the corridor. Of these, 30
households in six villages (Asurkhal, Baigananali, Benuadhar, Dhinkisal, Jajapur
Land identified to secure the corridor: In consultation with villagers, land from
and Kumbhalar) were surveyed. All these villages are tribal dominated settlements
four villages needs to be secured: Benuadhar (21 families with 116 acres),
and people have encroached upon forest areas. Tribal people from other areas
Chandanjharan (10 families with 40 acres), Baigananali (9 families with 38 acres)
clear forest areas and settle, hoping to get patta land under the Forest Rights Act.
and Kumbhalar (16 families with 8 acres).
Of the six surveyed villages, Benuadhar and Kumbhalar are located in regular
254 255
5.18
Baula - Kuldiha
This corridor connects Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary with Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary.
Elephant movement occurs through hillocks and forest patches dotted with a
significant number of stone quarries. At times elephants also move to Hadgarh
Wildlife Sanctuary north of the Salandi Reservoir. The presence of stone quarries
3D map showing the landscape of the Baula - Kuldiha Corridor

and encroachment of the corridor forest by locals for agriculture and habitation
has caused fragmentation. This has forced elephants to use the hill tops to move
between the habitats.
Alternate Name Hadgarh-Kuldiha

State Odisha
Connectivity Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and
Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary
86° 17’ 41”- 86° 29’ 51” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Revenue Forest and
Patta Land
Major land use Forest, stone quarries, agriculture
fields and human settlements
Major habitation/settlements Nuabalipala, Rangamatia, Dakei,
Shohalabhauni, Kantamari,
Kantabari, Ranipokhari
area of 0.16 ha. Of these, 12 species are palatable to elephants. The maximum
256 257
frequency found was of Shorea robusta (46), followed by Terminalia tomentosa

(13), Cleistanthus collinus (9), Albizia lebbeck (8) and Lagerstroemia parviflora
(6). Maximum average GBH was found in Ailanthus excels (97 cm) followed by
Pongamia pinata (71 cm) and Ziziphus oenoplia (63 cm). Maximum average height
was found in Dala Sujuni (15.24 m), followed by Ailanthus excels (13.72 m), Albizia
lebbeck (5.83 m) and Cassia fistula (5.49 m). Signs of both wood cutting and/
or lopping were found in 70% of the total plants in the sampled areas. Shorea
robusta was found with considerable signs of lopping and wood cutting, which
shows the corridor vegetation is under immense anthropogenic pressure. The
ground cover included barren ground (58.44%), shrubs (27.50%), herbs (7.19%)
and grasses (6.88%).
Map of the Baula - Kuldiha Corridor

Hadgarh WLS: 45
Baripada Forest Division: 68
Balasore Wildlife Division: 89
Forest/Land use
Buildings/Artefacts: Stone quarries and crushers
Agriculture fields
Human habitations: Nuabalipala, Rangamatia, Dakei, Shohalabhauni, Kantamari,
Kantabari, Ranipokhari
Road: Connecting Oupada and Kaptipada

Mountain Range: Parts of Eastern Ghats
Elephant range: East-Central India
Protected Areas: Hadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary
258 259
HUMAN DIMENSIONS A total of 36 villages are located in and around the corridor. Of these, 49 families
in five villages (Shohalabhauni, Kurhadighasa, Nuabalipal, Rangamatia and Dakei)
Threats were surveyed. Nuabalipal village was relocated from inundated areas of the
1. Stone quarries: A large number of stone quarries are located in and around Salandi Reservoir. Dakei is an encroached village, about four to five years old.
the corridor forest. Quarrying activities affect elephant movement through the Thirteen families of Banra village have cleared the corridor forest and settled
corridor and have substantially narrowed its width and caused the habitat to in Dakei.
deteriorate.
A majority (94%) of sampled villagers are farmers and or daily wage labourers
2. Stone crusher plants are also present close to the corridor forest, hindering in the nearby stone quarries and stone crusher plants. Local people also sell
elephant movement. fuelwood in large quantities in nearby markets for their livelihood. Villagers
depend upon the corridor forest for the collection of fuelwood, Shorea robusta
3. Encroachment for agriculture and habitation: Tribals have encroached upon the leaves, chara, kusuma, mahula, karanja, kendu, wild potato, rai flower, amla,
corridor forest in the hope of getting patta land under the Forest Rights Act. mango, mushroom, bhalia, bel, jamun and wild vegetables.
4. Anthropogenic pressure: Local people extract fuelwood in large quantities from Corridor dependent villages: Hadgarh, Chanchalpada, Ketaki, Phuljhar,
the corridor forest for domestic as well as commercial purposes. They also Nuabalipala, Rangamatia, Ketaki, Rangamati, Rangamati, Siadimalia, Bhanra,
depend upon the corridor forest for collection of Shorea robusta leaves, other Bageipur, Kuturiapal, Gagua, Kadaligadia, Gadapokhari, Mankadapa,
NTFP, and livestock grazing. Kaithagadia, Paikapada, Mainshadala, Kurhadibasa, Ranipokhari, Kusumdaspur,
Khuntadihapatna, Lenkasahi, Gadasahi, Kabataghai,Ranipokhari, Kantabari,
5. Establishment of a brick kiln near Chanchalpada village downstream of the Shohalabhauni, Tolagadia, Kathachua, Kantamari, Ambadahi, Sarisua, Duguda.
Salandi Reservoir affects corridor usage by elephants.
Human–Elephant conflict: No elephant death has occurred due to conflict in the
6. A compound wall along the road between Salandi Dam and Hadgarh village corridor area during the last decade. Official records show the loss of six human
obstructs elephant movement. lives from 2006-07 to 2013-14 due to elephant attacks in the Hadgarh and Soro
Forest Ranges that fall under the corridor. Incidents of crop and property damage
7. Construction of a new road connecting Siadimalia and Bhanra through the remain high in Gadasahi and adjoining villages close to Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary.
corridor has caused fragmentation. The steep embankments of this road have
affected elephant movement.
CONSERVATION PLAN
8. Cemented embankments downstream of the Salandi Reservoir also affect

elephant movement.
encroachment of the corridor forest, illegal tree felling and developmental
Corridor villages: Shohalabhauni, Kantamari and Kantabari, Sarisuaghati,
activities hindering elephant movement.
Rangamatia, Dakei, Singhasahi (Maishadala Village).
260 261
2. No stone quarries should be allowed in the corridor forest. Lease permits of

existing stone quarries within the corridor should be cancelled.
3. No activities should be allowed from 6 pm to 6 am in stone quarries that are

located within 500 metres of the boundary of the corridor.
4. Habitat needs to be restored once stone quarries are vacated from inside the
corridor.
5. Shohalabhauni, Kantamari, Kantabari, Sarisuaghati, Rangamatia, Dakei and

Singhasahi (Maishadala village) need to be secured in consultation with villagers
on a priority basis.
6. Encroached areas of Shohalabhauni, Dakei, Kantabari and Kantamari villages

need to be cleared. Fig. 5.17: Stone quarrying in the corridor area
7. Brick kilns downstream of the Salandi Reservoir near Chanchalapada should

be closed.
8. No developmental or other activities obstructing elephant movement between

the dam area and Hadgarh village should be permitted.
Land identified to secure the corridor: In consultation with villagers, the following
identified areas need to be secured on a priority basis:
Village Families Area in acres Priority

Shohalabhauni 50 59.0 P2
Kantamari and 65 181.0 P2
Kantabari
Sarisuaghati 9 37.5 P1
Rangamatia 15 37.6 P1
Dakei 13 10.4 P1
Singhasahi 11 124 P2
(Mainshadala Fig. 5.18: Degraded corridor forest
Village)
262 263
5.19
Kanheijena - Anantapur
The corridor connects Kanheijena Reserve Forest of Angul Forest Division with
Anantapur Reserve Forest of Dhenkanal Forest Division. Elephants from Satkosia
3D map showing the landscape of the Kanheijena - Anantapur Corridor

Wildlife Sanctuary and Handapa Reserve Forest move through adjoining forest
patches of Simuliapadar Reserve Forest, Durgapur Reserve Forest, Nisha Protected
Forest, Kuio Protected Forest, Kauchiakhol Reserve Forest, Rakas Reserve Forest
and Kanheijena Reserve Forest to Anantapur Reserve Forest. National Highway
23, the construction of the Rengali irrigation canals, establishment of brick kilns
on the Brahmani river bank, and the presence of industries (fly-ash brick plant,
sponge iron and tar refinery) in Ekagharia village are major hurdles in the corridor,
severely affecting elephant movement.
State Odisha
Connectivity Talcher Range of Angul Forest
Division to Mahabir Road Range of
Dhenkanal Forest Division through
private lands
85° 9’ 20”- 85° 11’ 5” E
Legal status Private land and forest
Major land use Agriculture field, river, canal, human
settlement, highway, industries
Major habitation/settlements Ekagharia, Bikisar, Jaka and
Tumugula
264 265
area of 0.12 ha. Of these 10 species are palatable to elephants. The maximum
frequency found was of Shorea robusta (101), followed by Buchanania lanzan (22),
Terminalia tomentosa (9) and Semecarpus anacardium (8). Maximum average GHB
was found in Diospyros melanoxylon (95 cm), followed by Haldina cordifolia (47
cm), Aegle marmelos (45.5 cm), Terminalia tomentosa (44.44 cm) and Anogeissus
latifolia (40.5 cm). Maximum average height was found in Aegle marmelos (12.5
m), followed by Terminalia tomentosa (11.14 m), Haldina cordifolia (10.97), Lannea
coromandalica (10.26 m) and Dalbergia paniculata (10.06 m). Signs of wood
cutting and lopping were minimal in the sampled aea. Since village committees
Map of the Kanheijena - Anantapur Corridor

have been protecting the nearby forests, there is a reduced likelihood of illegal
tree felling.
The proportions of ground cover were: grasses (5.83 %), herbs (7.08 %), shrubs
(47.08 %) and barren ground (40 %).

Satkosia Wildlife Division: 146
Angul Forest Division: 40
Dhenkanal Forest Division: 165
Forest/Land use
Agriculture: Paddy
Habitations: Ekagharia, Bikisar, Jaka and Tumugula
Riverway: Rengali irrigation canals
Roadway: National Highway 23 connecting Talcher to Pallahara
Railway: Talcher (Odisha) to Bimlagarh (Jharkhand)
Buildings/Artefacts: Brick kilns, industries and factories, power lines
266 267
Other ecological importance However, the majority of villagers in Ekagharia and Bikisar primarily depend
Elephant Range: Central India upon the nearby industries and factories for their livelihood. A majority of the
Nearest Elephant Reserve: Proposed Baitarani ER sampled families depend upon the corridor forest for fuelwood extraction, which
Nearest Protected Area: Satkosia Wildlife Sanctuary and Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary is especially high in Tumugula and Bikisar. All respondents in Bikisar, Tumugula
and Jaka reported human-elephant conflict. Villagers from Tumugula and Jaka
reported an increased intensity of conflict and attributed this to an increase in
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
the elephant population, loss of forest cover, an increase in human settlements,
and a change in elephant behaviour.
Threats
1. Rengali Canals: Two irrigation canals bisect the corridor on either side of the
Corridor dependent villages: Ekagharia, Bikisar, Bilinda, Jaka, Tumugula,
Brahmani River. The cemented surface of the canals and the absence of suitable
Dangarbeda, Patuapali and Sarasikipal.
overpasses has severely obstructed elephant movement.
Human–Elephant Conflict: Conflict has been increasing over time. Between

2. Highway: NH 23 connecting Talcher to Pallahara traverses the corridor.
2006-07 and 2012-13, 16 people lost their lives and 13 were injured in elephant
Vehicular traffic was found to be 198.42 vehicles per hour from 6 am to 6 pm
attacks in the Talcher and Mahavir Road Forest Ranges of Angul and Dhenkanal
and 58.37 vehicles per hour from 6 pm to 6 am. Traffic remains high during the
Forest Divisions. During the same period, eight elephant deaths were reported in
operating hours of the factories located in and around the corridor.
these two forest ranges.
3. Brick kilns: Many brick kilns are established on the bank of the Brahmani River
within the corridor. Excavation of soil has resulted in the formation of deep CONSERVATION PLAN
pits, and human activities as well as vehicular movement hinder the movement
of elephants. The construction of a new railway track through the corridor, 1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department under
connecting Talcher to Bimlagarh, will further affect elephant movement. an appropriate law to prevent encroachment of the river banks, diversion of
forest land for non-forestry activities, and developmental activities in the corridor.
4. Industries and factories: Establishment of factories and industries in Ekagharia
village, such as Bindal Sponge Iron Ltd, Inter Continental Tar Refiners Ltd, and 2. All brick kilns established along the river within the corridor should be closed.
SMP Infra Pvt Ltd Fly Ash Brick Plant affect corridor usage.
3. Vehicular speed on NH 23 needs to be regulated through the use of physical
5. Settlements and expansion of agriculture: Expansion of Tumugula, Jaka, Ekagharia barriers within the corridor area.
and Bikisar villages as well as agricultural lands has hindered elephant movement.
4. Animal-friendly overpasses need to be created on the Rengali irrigation canals
Corridor villages: A total of eight villages are located in and around the corridor. to facilitate elephant movement. The overpass on the Rengali right bank canal
Of these 79 families in four villages (Ekagharia, Bikisar, Tumugula and Jaka) were should be located about 250 m from the fly-ash brick plant towards Angul (N
surveyed. Agriculture is the chief livelihood of the villagers in Jaka and Tumugula. 21.049689° E 85.159013°). On the Rengali left bank canal, the overpass should
268 269
be between Tumugula and Jaka village (N 21.065069° E 85.169378°).
5. Private lands measuring 124 acres (in Jaka, Tumugula and Ekagharia villages)
need to be secured.
6. The railway track being constructed through the corridor requires appropriate
mitigation measures to prevent a negative impact on elephant movement.
7. Strengthen village committees for better protection and conservation of the

corridor.

Jaka and Tumugula: 89 acres
Ekagharia: 35 acres
Benuadhar (21 families): 116 acres
Chandanjharan (10 families): 40 acres
Fig. 5.19: Rengali irrigation canal passing through the corridor
Baigananali (9 families): 38 acres
Kumbhalar (16 families): 8 acres
Fig. 5.20: Industries in Ekagharia village
270 271
5.20
ANANTAPUR - ASWAKHOLA (VIA JIRIDIMAL)
3D map showing the landscape of the Anantapur - Aswakhola (via Jiridimal) Corridor
The corridor connects Anantapur Reserve Forest and Aswakhola Reserve Forest
of Dhenkanal Forest Division, thereby maintaining elephant movement between
Anantapur Reserve Forest and Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary. Elephants move
through fragmented forest patches (Jiridamali Reserve Forest, Maulabhanja
Reserve Forest and Tipilei Reserve Forest) in a human dominated landscape with
a vast expanse of agriculture fields. National Highway 200 and the Rengali left
bank irrigation canal are key artefacts passing through the corridor, affecting
elephant movement. The proposed expansion of NH 200 and construction of
a new railway line connecting Angul and Sukinda will further affect elephant
State Odisha
Connectivity Anantapur Reserve Forest and
Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary
85° 34’ 32”- 85° 46’ 17” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Patta Land
Major land use Forest, agriculture land, human hab-
itation, irrigation canal
Major habitation/settlements Brahmania, Khatakhura, Bhandaria,
Kandhabola, Tulasiposi, Jamunakota,
Krushnapur, Orhana, Karamula and
Majhipala
272 273
Corridor habitat status: A total of 25 plant species were reported from the
sampled area of 0.16 ha. Of these, seven were found to be elephant food species.
The maximum tree frequency found was of Shorea robusta (225), followed by
Buchanania lanzan (10), Pterocarpus marsupium (10) and Madhuca indica (9).
Maximum average GBH was found in Haldina cordifolia (63 cm), followed by
Xylia xylocarpa (58 cm), Pterocarpus marsupium (57.1 cm), Casia fistula (50 cm)
and Ziziphus xylopyra (48 cm). Maximum average height was found in Pterocarpus
marsupium (14.72 m), followed by Shorea robusta (11.50 m), Ougeinia oojeinensis
Map of the Anantapur - Aswakhola (via Jiridimal) Corridor

(11.28 m), Xylia xylocarpa (10.67 m) and Casia fistula (9.75 m). A total of 10.46% of
sampled trees showed signs of lopping and/or wood cutting. Shorea robusta was
the species most affected.
The proportions of ground cover were recorded as: barren ground (62.81%),
shrubs (26.88%), herbs (6.25%) and grasses (4.06%).

(Elephant Census, Odisha, 2015)
Forest/Land use
Settlements: Brahmania, Khatakhura, Bhandaria, Kandhabola, Tulasiposi,
Jamunakota, Krushnapur, Orhana, Karamula and Majhipala
Agriculture field: Paddy
Roadway: NH 200 (Talcher-Chandikhol), Kamakhyanagar-Kankadahada PWD road
Irrigation Canal: Rengali left bank canal
Artefacts: Power line

276 275
Nearest Protected Area: Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary Corridor dependent villages: Hatibari, Goradapal, Surapratapapur, Anlapala,
Elephant Reserve: Proposed Baitarani Elephant Reserve Gobindapur, Marthapur, Badamuktaposi, Tangarapada, Mahupala, Godipokhari,
Nearest Tiger Reserve: Satkosia Tiger Reserve Arachua, Balisahi, Tarajungle, Makuakateni, Baghua.
Human–Elephant Conflict: Conflict is quite high in and around the corridor area.
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Between 2002-03 and 2012-13, 24 human lives were lost due to elephants (in
the Kamakhyanagar East and West Ranges). Crop damage is the chief concern
Threats
of farmers in the corridor area and has resulted in a negative attitude towards
1. Irrigation Canal: The Rengali left bank canal and its sub-canals pass through
elephant conservation and the securement of the corridor.
the corridor, fragmenting the once intact Jiridamali Reserve Forest and hindering
elephant movement.
2. Roadways: NH 200 connecting Talcher and Chandikhol, and another PWD road
CONSERVATION PLAN
connecting Kamakhyanagar and Kankadahada pass through the corridor. Vehicle
traffic was recorded at 402 vehicles per hour between 6 am and 6 pm and 202
vehicles per hour between 6 pm and 6 am on NH-200; and 157 vehicles per hour
between 6 am and 6 pm and 44 vehicles per hour between 6 pm and 6 am on
the PWD road. The expansion of NH 200 to a four-lane roadway will further affect
elephant movement.
2. Animal friendly overpasses should be created on the Rengali irrigation canal
3. Proposed railway track: A railway track connecting Angul and Sukinda is being
and its sub-canals to facilitate elephant movement.
constructed through the corridor, parallel to NH 200. This will bisect the corridor
near Mathakargola village.
3. Vehicle speeds on NH 200 need to be regulated within the corridor area.
4. Stone crusher plants: Stone crushers are present within the corridor near the
villages of Brahmania and Jamunakota.
4. Necessary mitigation measures should be taken to minimise the impact of the
5. Elephant Proof Trench: The digging of a trench along the villages to mitigate
NH 200 expansion as well as the new railway track being built in the area.
human-elephant conflict has obstructed normal elephant movement and led to
the increased fragmentation of the corridor forest.
5. Trenches and/or fences obstructing elephant movement should be removed
6. Farm houses: Two farm houses with mango orchards are located within the
and should not be encouraged as methods of mitigating human-elephant conflict.
corridor: along the Kamakhyanagar-Kankadahada road and in Tulsiposi village
near Maulabhanja Reserve Forest.
6. Lease permits of existing stone crusher plants and quarries falling within the
elephant movement range should be cancelled.
Corridor villages: Brahmania, Khatakhura, Bhandaria, Baghabasa, Kandhabola,
Tulasiposi, Jamunakot, Krushnapur, Orhana, Majhipala and Karamula. About 26
villages are located in and around the corridor.
276 277
5.21
Aswakhola - Sunajhari
This corridor connects Aswakhola Reserve Forest and Sunajhari Reserve Forest,
thereby connecting the elephant populations of Anantapur Reserve Forest
and Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary. Elephant movement occurs through densely
3D map showing the landscape of the Aswakhola - Sunajhari Corridor

populated villages and a vast expanse of agriculture fields. Elephants cross the
Brahmani River near Kaluriapatna and Goradiha villages. A sub-canal of the
Rengali left bank canal passes through the corridor along the foothills of Sunajhari
Reserve Forest.
State Odisha
Connectivity Anantapur Reserve Forest and
Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary
Length and Width Length 13.5 km, width 0- 0.5 km
85° 35’ 56”- 85° 45’ 25” E
Legal status Patta Land
habitations, river
Major habitation/settlements Makundapur, Kanka, Kaluriapatna,
Latadeipur, Radhadeipur,
Goradiha, Balichaturi, Balipada,
Dimiria, Saradeipur
Corridor habitat status: The corridor comprises private lands, agriculture fields
and river banks. Plantations of Acacia catechu, cashew and other species are
found along the river bank.
278 279

Forest/Land use
Agriculture: Paddy
Habitations: Makundapur, Kanka, Kaluriapatna, Latadeipur, Radhadeipur,
Goradiha, Balichaturi, Balipada, Dimiria, Saradeipur
River: Brahmani
Irrigation canal: A sub-canal of the Rengali left bank canal

Map of the Aswakhola - Sunajhari Corridor

Nearest Protected Area: Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary
Elephant Reserve: Proposed Baitarani Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human habitations: Around 13 highly populated villages are located in and
around the corridor. Elephants move through the village areas between the
habitat patches.
2. Agriculture fields: A vast expanse of crop fields falls within the corridor. Farmers
plant crops twice a year.
3. Irrigation canal: A sub-canal of the Rengali left bank canal passes through the
corridor near Santrapur village in the foothills of Bhairapur Reserve Forest.
Corridor dependent villages: Makundapur, Kanka, Kendupada, Kaluriapatna,

Latadeipur, Radhadeipur, Goradiha, Ranka, Balichaturi, Balipada, Santrapur,
Dimiria and Saradeipur.
280 281
Human–Elephant Conflict: Crop depredation by elephants is a major concern in

the region. Farmers plant their crops twice a year and agriculture is the primary
livelihood of the local people.
CONSERVATION PLAN
developmental activities hindering elephant movement.
2. Measures should be taken to mitigate human-elephant conflict. Additionally,

ex-gratia support should be provided to victims, which will help in eliciting the
support of local communities for elephant conservation and corridor securement.
3. Active participation of local communities is required for the mitigation of Fig. 5.21: A settlement in the corridor
human-elephant conflict.
Fig. 5.22: Fuelwood extraction from the corridor forest by villagers
282 283
5.22
Buguda - Central
The Buguda-Central corridor connects Baisipali Wildlife Sanctuary with North

Ghumusar Forest Division through the Central Reserve Forest of Nayagarh Forest
Division. The corridor comprises teak plantations, revenue lands, private lands,
3D map showing the landscape of the Buguda-Central Corridor

a river, National Highway 57, a college, and human settlements. The presence
especially of Buguda Colony, the college and NH 57 in the corridor area has
impacted elephant movement through the corridor. Soil erosion further leads to
fragmentation of the corridor.
Alternate Name Baisipali WLS - Central RF

State Odisha
Connectivity Baisipali Wildlife Sanctuary to North
Ghumusar Forest Division
Length and Width 2.2 km and 0.2-0.3 km
84° 43’ 22”- 84° 44’ 1” E
Legal status Revenue Land, Patta Land
Major land use Agriculture fields, human
settlements, road, college
Major habitation/settlements Buguda Colony
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular (throughout the year)
Corridor habitat status: A total of 20 plant species were found in a sampled area
of 0.8 ha. Of these, seven are palatable to elephants. The maximum frequency
recorded was of Shorea robusta (12), followed by Buchanania lanzan (6), Terminalia
284 285
tomentosa (4), Cleistanthus collinus (3) and Semecarpus anacardium (3). Maximum
average GBH was found in Madhuca indica (128 cm), followed by Bombax ceiba
(111 cm), Mitragyna parviflora (109 cm) and Shorea robusta (108.82 cm). Maximum
average height was found in Madhuca indica (19.81 m), followed by Bombax ceiba
(16.76 m), Shorea robusta (16.57 m) and Mitragyna parviflora (15.24 m). Signs of
wood cutting and lopping were found in 28.26% of sampled plants, including
species palatable to elephants such as Shorea robusta, Buchanania lanzan and
Mitragyna parviflora.
Map of the Baguda – Central Corridor area showing the land to be secured
The ground cover showed a high percentage of barren ground (35.00%), followed
by herbs (29.38%), shrubs (26.25%) and grasses (9.38%).

Nayagarh Forest Division: 17
Mahanadi Wildlife Division: 88
North Ghumsur Forest Division: 21
Forest/Land use
Legal status: Revenue land, Patta land
Agricultural fields
Buildings/Artefacts: Private college, Kendu leaf storehouse, Solar fencing
Road: NH 57 (Nayagarh-Boudh)

Mountain Range: Part of Eastern Ghats
Protected Area: Baisipali Wildlife Sanctuary
Elephant Reserve: Mahanadi Elephant Reserve
Tiger Reserve: Satkosia Tiger Reserve
286 287
HUMAN DIMENSIONS are five villages in and around the corridor. Of these, Buguda Colony with about
41 families is situated to the south of the National Highway within the corridor.
Threats Most of the villagers are farmers and depend upon the forest patches for their
1. National Highway: NH 57 connecting Nayagarh to Boudh district bisects the daily needs.
corridor near Buguda Colony. There is vehicular traffic on the highway around
the clock. Human-Elephant Conflict: Crop depredation by elephants is reported in the
area. No human or elephant casualties have been reported in the area in the
2. College: A private college has been established on government land since 1994. last few years.
This has further encroached three acres of land in plot no. 344. The presence of
this college has also led to the expansion of shops, hotels and other structures
along the highway. CONSERVATION PLAN
3. Human settlements: Human settlements and agricultural fields are present 1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department
within the corridor. under an appropriate law, and necessary measures should be taken to prevent
developmental activities detrimental to the corridor and elephant movement.
4. Solar fencing: In order to mitigate human-wildlife conflict and provide safe
passage to elephants, the forest department has erected a solar fence. However, 2. Land under the revenue department between Baisipali Wildlife Sanctuary
this has become a barrier to elephants using the corridor rather than providing and Central Reserve Forest should be handed over to the forest department to
safe passage. develop forest cover.
5. Soil erosion: Rain water flowing from the Baisipali Wildlife Sanctuary has caused 3. In consultation with villagers, Buguda Colony which is located inside the
soil erosion, resulting in a pit more than 15 feet deep being formed along the corridor could be secured.
highway in the corridor, hindering elephant movement.
4. In consultation with villagers, agriculture lands in Mitukuli village located to the
6. The Brutanga Irrigation Project on the Brutanga River (a tributary of the south of the Brutanga River could be secured.
Mahanadi) has been approved and the irrigation canal will pass through the
corridor. This will impact elephant movement. 5. The private college established in the corridor along the highway should be
relocated.
7. A proposed railway track connecting Khurdha with Bolangir is a potential threat
to the corridor. 6. Soil erosion along the highway needs to be checked.
Corridor dependent villages: Buguda Colony (41 families), Buguda (67 families), 7. Mitigation measures should be put in place for the forthcoming Brutanga
Jhintikabari (40 families), Mitukuli (45 families) and Tilabadi (60 families). There Major Irrigation Project, where the irrigation canal will pass through the corridor.
288 289
Land identified to secure the corridor: The width of the corridor varies from
200-300 metres and is very narrow for elephant movement. Given the
importance of the corridor and the need to mitigate human-elephant conflict,
Buguda Colony (41 families) could be considered for relocation following due
consultation with villagers and the provision of a suitable compensation package.
Similarly, the private college present in the critical elephant movement route
has been identified for relocation outside the corridor. Agriculture fields under
Mitukuli village on the south bank of the Brutanga River have also been identified
to secure the corridor.
Details of land to be secured:

1. Buguda Colony: Patta land: 161. 0 acres
2. Private College: Revenue land: 3.00 acres
3. Mitukuli: 33 + 21 acres
Fig. 5.23: Buguda Colony situated in the corridor
Fig. 5.24: NH 57 with heavy traffic passing through the corridor
290 291
5.23
Nuagaon-Baruni
This corridor connects Nuagaon Reserve Forest with Baruni Reserve Forest
(East & West) thereby connecting the elephant population of Satkosia Tiger
Reserve and Khalasuni Wildlife Sanctuary through Raun Reserve Forest and Tal
3D map showing the landscape of the Nuagaon-Baruni corridor

Reserve Forest. The construction of the Manjore Medium Irrigation Project near
Manarbeda village has caused fragmentation and deterioration of the corridor
forest and affected elephant movement between these habitats.
State Odisha
Connectivity Satkosia Wildlife Sanctuary and
Baruni (East & West) Reserve Forest
Length and Width 4-5.8 km and 0.57-3.5 km
84° 23’ 10”- 84° 26’ 57” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Khesara Forest
Major land use Forest, agriculture field, human
settlements, Manjore Medium
Irrigation Project
Major habitation/settlements Manarbeda, Patrapada
area of 0.16 ha. Of these, eight are elephant food species. The maximum
frequency recorded was of Shorea robusta (42), followed by Anogeissus latifolia
(26), Terminalia tomentosa (12) and Cleistanthus collinus (8). Maximum average
GBH was found in Madhuca indica (108 cm) followed by Boswellia serrata (90.33
292 293
cm), Diospyros melanoxylon (79.75 cm) and Cochlospermum religiosum (79 cm).
Maximum average height was found in Boswellia serrata (15.85 m), followed by
Cochlospermum religiosum (14.43 m), Dalbergia paniculata (14.02 m) and Madhuca
indica (12.8 m). Of a total of 129 plants found in the sampled area, 34 were found
felled, showing extensive wood cutting in the corridor forest.
The proportions of ground cover were: barren ground (39.06%), shrubs (30.94%),
grasses (17.81%) and herbs (12.19%).
Map of the Nuagaon-Baruni Corridor area showing the land to be secured

Athamalik Forest Division: 56
Rairakhol Forest Division: 9
Forest/Land use
Agriculture: Paddy
Human habitations: Manarbeda and Patrapada
Artefacts: Manjore Medium Irrigation Project (MIP), irrigation canal
Road: Madhapur-Bamur RD Road

Elephant Reserve: Mahanadi Elephant Reserve
Nearest Protected Area: Satkosia Wildlife Sanctuary
Tiger Reserve: Satkosia Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human settlements: Manarbeda and Patrapada, two villages situated in the
corridor, have expanded due to the resettlement of families for the Manjore
Medium Irrigation Project, resulting in the width of the corridor being reduced.
294 295
2. Land use changes: Excavation of soil during the construction of the Manjore Corridor dependent villages: Manarbeda, Patrapada, Naktideol, Gudgudu,
Medium Irrigation Project has resulted in portions of corridor forest being cleared, Routpada, Muchhapur, Digipadar, Nuagaon, Saragiseni, Madanpur, Sorisapanka,
with some areas now under cultivation and others allocated to relocated families. Chandrapur, Bhartapur, Purunapani, Kumurisingha, Singharimunda, Bhagbanpur,
Barapadar, Tulsipur.
3. Buildings of the Manjore Irrigation Project: The guest house and staff quarters
are situated between the dam and a forest patch within the corridor, obstructing Human-Elephant Conflict: Increased incidences of conflict are reported due to
elephant movement. a purported rise in elephant numbers, resulting in increased crop damage in
villages in and around the corridor. Between 2002-03 and 2011-12, nine elephant
4. Road and Irrigation Canal: The Bamur-Madhapur road and two canals running and five human deaths were reported due to conflict. Elephant deaths have been
from the Manjore Irrigation Project traverse the corridor, fragmenting a once occurring every year since 2007-08.
continuous forest patch.
The surveyed villagers indicated that they believed human-elephant conflict had
5. Tourist movement: The Manjore Irrigation Project attracts tourists around risen due to an increase in the elephant population. However, they also considered
the year, reaching a peak in winter which is also the peak season for elephant the loss of forest area, increase in human settlements, and a change in elephant
movement. behaviour (with elephants coming to the Manjore Dam for water) as reasons. Most
villagers suggested solar fencing along the forest border to secure the corridor, as
6. Anthropogenic pressure: People from within a periphery of 10-15 km of the well as the protection and improvement of elephant habitat. Some suggested the
corridor extensively extract forest produce from Nuagaon and Baruni (East and formation of a special squad to guard elephants.
West) Reserve Forests, for subsistence as well as commercial purposes.
CONSERVATION PLAN
7. One stone crusher plant is functional next to the corridor forest near
Manarbeda village. 1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and legally
protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment, diversion of forest
8. Traffic intensity: Vehicle movement is restricted from early mornings to late land for non-forestry activities and developmental activities that hinder animal
evenings, with no movement from 9pm to 4 am. More than 90% of vehicles are movement.
two- and four-wheelers.
2. In consultation with the villagers, about 136 acres of identified lands near
Corridor villages: Manarbeda and Patrapada. A total of 19 villages are present in Manarbeda and Patrapada village could be secured.
and around the corridor. Some 41 families in these two villages were surveyed,
revealing that agriculture is the primary livelihood and more than 80% of the total 3. Voluntary relocation of 15 families of Manarbeda 1 (Tulasimunda hamlet) to an
lands occupied by the respondents are under cultivation. Villagers depend upon alternate site outside the corridor could be initiated.
the corridor forest for fuelwood, agriculture, and extracting the leaves of Shorea
robusta and Diospyros melanoxylon. 4. Construction should be avoided in the areas downstream of the Manjore Dam,
especially on the forest fringes.
296 297
5. The cementing of both sides of the irrigation canal should be prevented to

facilitate elephant movement.
6. The Khesara forest in the corridor area needs to be notified as a Reserve Forest.
7. Ensure that illegal tree felling and extraction of stones is stopped.
Fig. 5.25: Irrigation canal and Madhapur-Bamur road running parallel through the corridor
8. Establishment of new stone crusher plants should not be allowed at least 500
metres from the corridor.
9. Tourist movement needs to be regulated and picnics should not be entertained

in corridor areas (near the Manjore Dam).

Two sites in Patrapada and one site in Manarbeda (below the Manjore Irrigation
Project) have been identified to secure the corridor. Fifteen families from
Tulasimunda hamlet of Manarbeda need to be relocated.
298 299
5.24
Tal-Kholgarh
This corridor connects Tal Reserve Forest with Kholgarh Reserve Forest and
Landakot Reserve Forest, thereby allowing for elephant movement between
Khalasuni Wildlife Sanctuary and Satkosia Wildlife Sanctuary through Baruni
Reserve Forest (East & West) and Raun Reserve Forest. National Highway 55
3D map showing the landscape of the Tal-Kholgarh Corridor

and the railway track connecting Angul and Sambalpur districts pass through
the corridor. Heavy traffic on NH 55 and infrastructure development along the
highway has affected elephant movement. The proposed conversion of NH 55 to
four lanes and of the railway to double lanes will aggravate the situation. Elephants
cross the railway track between Kuhi and Purunagarh villages.
State Odisha
Connectivity Satkosia Wildlife Sanctuary and
Khalasuni Wildlife Sanctuary
84° 17’ 53”- 84° 19’ 14” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Khesara Forest
Major land use Forest, agriculture, human
habitation, highway, railway
Major habitation/settlements Purunagarh, Kuhi, Barsikia
area. Of these, eight are palatable to elephants. The maximum average GBH
300 301
was found in Bombax ceiba (137 cm), followed by Lagerstroemia parviflora (101),
Buchanania lanzan (82), Lannea coromandalica (75.33). Maximum average height
was found in Buchanania lanzan (15 cm), followed by Bombax ceiba (12.9 cm) and
Lannea coromandalica (12.5 cm). The highest tree frequency was of Terminalia
tomentosa (14), followed by Cleistanthus collinus (9), Mitragyna parvifolia (8) and
Anogeissus latifolia (4). More than 50% of the total trees found in the sampled plot
had been lopped, showing a severe threat to the corridor habitat.
The proportion of ground cover recorded was barren ground (39.38%), shrubs
Map of the Tal-Kholgarh Corridor area showing the land to be secured

(33.13%), grasses (18.75%) and herbs (8.75%).

Athamalik Forest Division: 56
Rairakhol Forest Division: 9
Forest/Land use
Habitations: Kuhi, Purunagarh, Barasikiya
Agriculture fields
Highway: NH 55 (conecting Sambalpur and Cuttack)
Railway: Sambalpur-Angul
Other Ecological Importance

Elephant Reserve: Sambalpur Elephant Reserve
Nearest Protected Area: Khalasuni Wildlife Sanctuary
Nearest Tiger Reserve: Satkosia Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. National Highway: NH 55 connecting Sambalpur and Cuttack passes through
the corridor. Average traffic was found to be 258.29 vehicles per hour from 6 am
302 303
to 6 pm and 105.87 vehicles per hour from 6 pm to 6 am. Human-Elephant Conflict: Three human deaths caused by elephant attacks
were reported between 2002-03 and 2011-12 in the corridor area. Farmers from
2. Obstructions: A private nursery with 20 acres of land and an industrial unit the surrounding villages leave a significant portion of their fields uncultivated
(Meerabasanti Industry Pvt Ltd) situated near Barsikia village on either side of NH due to frequent crop damage by elephants. Elephants have also reportedly killed
55 have obstructed the corridor. livestock in this area.
3. Railway: A three-kilometre stretch of the Sambalpur-Angul railway track All the respondents reported an increase in human-elephant conflict in the
passes through the corridor. Elephants cross the track between the villages of corridor area. They viewed an increase in elephant population, the loss of forests
Podabalanda and Purunagarh. There is a proposal for this track to be expanded, and the increase in human settlements as the main causes of conflict.
which will further deteriorate the corridor.
4. Construction along the highway: The construction of industries, hotels and an CONSERVATION PLAN
engineering college, and the expansion of settlements near NH 55, have further
fragmented the corridor.
an appropriate law to prevent encroachment, diversion of forest land for non-
forestry activities, and developmental activities inimical to animal movement.
5. Encroachment: Purunagarh, Kuhi and Chiriginipal villages have encroached
upon the corridor, reducing its width significantly.
2. The lands identified near Purunagarh, Birachandrapur (including the nursery)
and Barsikiya could be secured in consultation with villagers and conserved with
6. Power lines: Part of the corridor forest has been cleared for the high-tension
the active participation of the local communities and district administration.
power lines that pass through it.
3. Notification of the Khesara Forest in the corridor area as a Reserve Forest.

Corridor villages: Purunagarh and Barasikia.
4. No developmental activities should be permitted on either side of National

A total of 11 villages are located in and around the corridor. Of these, four villages,
Highway 55 in the corridor.
namely Puruagarh, Kuhi, Barasikia and Birachandrapur, are located very close to
the corridor. Sixty-three families in these four villages were surveyed. Villagers
5. Meerabasanti Industry Pvt Limited needs to be shifted out of the corridor area.
depend upon agriculture and are marginal farmers with landholdings of up to
five acres. Almost 20% of the total land occupied by the farmers is left fallow
6. Suitable barriers need to be placed on NH 55 to restrict vehicle speed during
due to frequent crop damage by elephants. Villagers depend upon the corridor
peak elephant movement. A flyover should be constructed for vehicles in the
forest for fuelwood, cattle grazing, agriculture, wood for contruction of houses,
corridor area so that elephants can safely pass through the corridor.
grasses for making brooms, and Shorea robusta leaves.
7. The proposed railway expansion should include appropriate mitigation

Corridor dependent villages: Barsikia, Podabalanda, Kuhi, Purunagarh,
measures. An underpass could be considered within the corridor area.
Damagarh, Tal, Tumbamal, Ambjhari, Bijakhaman, Kendumunda and Chiriginipal.
304 305
Village Extent of area (in acres) Priority

Birachandrapur and 52 P1
Barasikia P1
Kuhi 17.5 P2
Purunagarh 1 34 P1
Purunagarh 2 36.5 P2
Fig. 5.27: Sambalpur-Angul railway track passing through the corridor

Fig. 5.26: National Highway 55 passing through the corridor
306 307
5.25
Kotagarh – Pankhalgudi
This corridor connects Kotagarh Wildlife Sanctuary with Pankhalgudi Reserve

Forest under the Muniguda Range of Rayagada Forest Division. Elephants from
Kotagarh Wildlife Sanctuary cross State Highway 5 between Pandaripi and
3D map showing the landscape of the Kotagarh – Pankhalgudi Corridor

Getabali village to enter Laseri Extension Forest and Madagurdi Reserve Forest,
leading on to Pankhalgudi Reserve Forest. Agricultural activity in the forest areas
has fragmented and degraded the habitat and reduced elephant movement.
Alternate Name Kotgarh-Chandrapur

State Odisha
Connectivity Kotagarh Wildlife Sanctuary and
Pankhalgudi Reserve Forest under
Rayagada Forest Division
83° 40’ 32”- 83° 43’ 13” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Patta Lands
Major land use Forest, agriculture field, settlement
Major habitation/settlements Mundagaon, Pandaripi, Nua
Bhandiri, Bhejipadar, Mundama,
Majhurkupa
Corridor habitat status: The corridor consists of fragmented forest patches,

agriculture fields and human habitation. The forest cover is almost intact along
308 309
SH 5 and the vegetation is dominated by Shorea robusta. The connecting

forest between Laseri Extension Reserve Forest and Madagudi Reserve Forest
comprises scattered stretches of degraded forest patches. Pankalgudi Reserve
Forest was reported to harbour abundant bamboo patches; shifting cultivation
has degraded these and opened up the once intact forest.

Balliguda Forest Division: 46
Map of the Kotagarh - Pankhalgudi Corridor area showing the land to be secured
Rayagada Forest Division: 9
Forest/Land use
Agriculture fields: Permanent and shifting cultivation
Human habitation: Mundagaon, Pandaripi, Nua Bhandiri, Bhejipadar, Mundama,
Majhurkupa
Road: State Highway 5
River: Chauladhua and Pipadi

Mountain Range: Parts of Eastern Ghats
Elephant Reserve: Proposed South Orissa Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Kotagarh Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Cultivation: Agriculture is extensively practiced by locals within the corridor
forest in Pankhalgudi Reserve Forest, Madagudi Reserve Forest, Laseri Extension
Reserve Forest and Kotagarh Wildlife Sanctuary.
2. Shifting cultivation and habitations: The prevalence of shifting cultivation means

that people also shift habitations when they move to new areas.
310 311
3. Encroachment: People have encroached upon the corridor forest for agriculture, CONSERVATION PLAN
and have established settlements with the intention of getting patta land under
the Forest Rights Act. 1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department
under an appropriate law, and necessary action should be taken to prevent the
4. Expansion of State Highway 5: Although the present traffic intensity is only about encroachment of corridor forest and developmental activities detrimental to the
11 vehicles per hour, this is expected to increase with the expansion of the road corridor.
and industrial growth in the area (Vedanta Aluminium Refinery and JK Paper Mills
in Rayagada district). 2. Cultivation and encroachment for settlement should be prevented in the
corridor forest. Also, the existing encroached settlements and areas under shifting
Corridor villages: Pandaripi, Mundagaon, Nua Bhandiri, Bhejipadar and cultivation need to be cleared.
Majhurkupa are located in critical areas of the corridor.
3. Forest patches degraded due to shifting cultivation and encroachment should
Twenty villages are located in and around the corridor. Villagers are mostly farmers be restored.
and depend upon casual labour for their livelihood. They depend upon the
corridor forest for Shorea robusta leaves, mushrooms and other NTFP, as well as 4. Identified lands need to be secured in consultation with villagers.
fuelwood, timber and livestock grazing. People from other parts have encroached
upon the corridor forest. This is a common practice: people clear forest patches, Land identified to secure the corridor
practice agriculture for three to five years then shift to new sites. Rice, mandia The connectivity between Laseri Reserve Forest and Laseri Extension Reserve
(Eleusine coracana), maize (Zea maize), koer, jhodanga (Vigna unguiculata), kadua, Forest (between the villages of Pandaripi and Mundagaon) has been decreasing
biri (Vigna mungo), simba (Dolichos lablab) and brinjal are the primary crops. due to the encroachment of forest land for agriculture and the establishment
of human settlements. A vast expanse of private land is also present between
Corridor dependent villages: Pandaripi, Getabali, Mundagaon, Nua Bhandiri, Laseri Extension Reserve Forest and the confluence of the Chauladhua and Pipadi
Bhejipadar, Majhurkupa, Kalesiguda, Mundama, Sulikupda, Nilliguda, Panaspadar, Rivers. This area belongs to the villagers of Pandaripi, Bhejipadar and Nuabalipal.
Madagudi, Kalagudi, Gotagudi, Kesaragudi, Jubagudi and Mudiguda. Fragmentation of forest patches has been hindering elephant movement between
Kotagarh Wildlife Sanctuary and Muniguda Range. The following extent of land is
Human-Elephant Conflict: Eight human deaths and one case of human injury required to secure the corridor:
caused by elephants were reported in 2009-10 in Balliguda Forest Division. In
Rayagada Forest Division, three elephant deaths (two electrocutions in 2009-10, Village Families Area in acres Priority
one poaching incident in 2011-12) and seven human deaths (one in 2006-07, four Pandaripi and 60+7 372.5 P1
in 2007-08, two in 2010-11) occurred due to conflict. Bhejipadar
Mundagaon 20 245 P1
Crop depredation and property damage by elephants have also been reported Bhejipadar 20 187 P2
in the corridor fringe villages of Pandaripi, Mundagaon, Bhejipadar, Nua Bhandiri Mundama 10 60 P2
and Majhurkupa.
312 313
06 THE ELEPHANTS OF NORTHERN WEST

represent the westernmost extension of the North-
BENGAL
Eastern population of Asian elephants in India. The

Elephant corridors of Western Duars lie at the confluence of the Himalayas
Northern West Bengal and the Indo-Gangetic flood plains. The elephant range is
Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Adrish Poddar and K Ramkumar bounded by Nepal to the west, Bhutan to the north and
Bangladesh to the south. Forest landscape connectivity is
maintained between Nepal, Bhutan and India. The region
has about 488 elephants (MoEF&CC, 2017) between the
Sankosh and Mechi Rivers and spread over the districts
of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar and Coochbehar,
comprising nine forest divisions: Kurseong, Wildlife I,
Baikunthapur, Kalimpong, Wildlife II, Jalpaiguri, Wildlife III
, Buxa Tiger Reserve (East) and Buxa Tiger Reserve (West)
(Das, undated). The elephant population of northern West
Bengal is contiguous with the Chirang-Ripu Elephant
Reserve in Assam as well as adjacent habitats of Bhutan
and Nepal. Biogeographically, the entire northern
elephant range comprises two major biotic provinces: the
Siwalik/Bhabar and the lower Gangetic plains. The area is
part of the Eastern Himalayan biodiversity hotspot.
Northern West Bengal has a forest area of 3051 sq km

(25.7% of the state’s forest area), of which elephant
habitat is confined to about 2000 sq km in three distinct
geographical zones:
(a) The Terai zone between the Mechi River and the Teesta
River, comprising forest areas under Kurseong Division
and Wildlife Division I (Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary).
<< Elephants crossing Buxa

- Titi (via Beech) Corridor
in northern West Bengal
18 315
(b) The Western Duars zone between the Teesta and the Torsa Rivers, comprising Elephants in North Bengal have significantly larger home ranges than in most
the Apalchand Range of Baikunthapur Division; Jalpaiguri Division and Wildlife other parts of the country; the average home range is estimated to be 588 sq
Division II (including Gorumara National Park and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary); km in Buxa Tiger Reserve (Sukumar et al., 2003). This high degree of ranging by
Kalimpong Division and Wildlife Division III (including the western part of Jaldapara elephants in search of food, along with a high human population density and
Wildlife Sanctuary). activity, increases conflict in the landscape.
(c) The Eastern Duars zone between the Torsa and Sankosh Rivers bordering Major elephant movement takes place through the tea gardens. Almost 90% of
Assam and Bhutan, and the forests of Wildlife Division III (eastern part of Jaldapara the tea gardens in Jalpaiguri (Alipurduar included) and 30% in Darjeeling are within
Wildlife Sanctuary and Buxa Tiger Reserve). the zone of conflict. Another major hurdle to the free movement of elephants and
their conservation is the railway track between Siliguri Junction and Alipurduar
The elephant range in North Bengal consists of flat, slightly undulating to hilly Junction that stretches over 168 km, almost 74 km (44% of its length) of which is
terrain up to an elevation of 1750 m, with numerous rivers (Mechi, Teesta, Torsa, through forest that includes three Protected Areas (Mahananda, Chapramari and
Raidak, Jainti, Dima, Basra, Diana, Murti, Jaldhaka, Neora, Leesh-Gheesh, Balason, Jaldapara Wildlife Sanctuaries as well as
Sankosh) and hill streams running from north to south. The average annual buffer areas of Buxa Tiger Reserve), and A major conservation
rainfall is 3498 mm with temperature varying between 8⁰C and 32⁰C. The forest passes through 10 important elephant hurdle is the railway
types found in this region include dry deciduous, moist deciduous, semi evergreen passages/corridors. This track was track between Siliguri
and evergreen forests, with sal (Shorea robusta) and its associates dominating. responsible for the death of 27 elephants junction and Alipurduar
between 1974 and 2003. It was converted
junction, which has
About 34% of the elephant range in North Bengal is under forest cover, 22% into broad gauge in 2003 and nearly 56
caused the death of 56
under tea plantation, 17% under agriculture and 27% under human habitation elephants died between 2004 and 2016.
and development activities. As per the 2011 census, the average human density Due to the high mortality of animals, it
elephants between
in the Duars and the Terai region is 679 persons per sq km. has come to be known as the ‘killer track’. 2004 and 2016
Although the region supports less than 2% of the total elephant population of Both the Terai and the Western Duars have patchy habitat (human habitation
India, it accounts for almost 12% of all human deaths caused by elephants in the and tea gardens interspersed with forests) through which regular elephant
country. Cases of human injury or death, crop depredation and property damage movement occurs. The main concern about the elephant population of Northern
are on the increase. Between 2007-08 and 2015-16, 433 cases pertaining to West Bengal is the increasing trend of human-elephant conflict, which is a major
loss of human life were recorded in North Bengal – which translates to over 48 hurdle in the conservation of elephants in the region (Das, undated, Chakraborty,
human lives lost per year due to elephants. Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, the 2015 and Mukherjee, 2016). Only the elephant population (about 235 elephants)
state forest department paid an ex-gratia of more than Rs 7.7 crore for human in the Eastern Duars (Buxa Tiger Reserve and part of Jaldapara), which has
injury or loss of life, crop depredation and damage to houses/huts, apart from the good forests can be called a comparatively viable population. The future of over
large sums of money spent to undertake mitigation measures to reduce human- 285 elephants between the Teesta and Torsa Rivers remains uncertain, with
elephant conflict. the fragmentation of forest areas in Baikunthapur, Kalimpong, Jalpaiguri and
316 317
Wildlife Division III due to tea plantations and factories, human settlements,
agriculture lands, linear infrastructure elements (roads and railway lines) and
mining resulting in increased human-elephant conflict.
The elephant corridor between Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary and Baikunthapur

Forest Division along the Teesta River is vital for elephant movement. The West
Bengal Forest Department has notified about 40 hectares of Teesta chaur
(flood plain) area in the corridor as a wildlife sanctuary, and this will significantly
contribute to the protection of the corridor and facilitate elephant movement.
There is also a need to re-establish the corridor between the North Diana and
Rethi forests, which serves as a link for herds in the Tonda and Titi forests.
Elephant corridors in Northern West Bengal

In the Terai, the movement of elephants from Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary to
Bahundangi in the Jhapa district of eastern Nepal has been severely affected due
to forest fragmentation in the Panighata Range, as well as power fencing of about
18 km along the Mechi River in Nepal. This has abruptly halted the movement of
80-100 elephants beyond Kolabari near the border and has increased human-
elephant conflict on the Indian side.
The Buxa-Ripu (Sankosh) elephant corridor linking the population of the Eastern
Duars and Buxa Tiger Reserve to Manas Tiger Reserve in Assam needs to be
secured. Elephant movement has been severely affected due to large-scale
encroachment and tree felling in Kochugaon Forest Division and other areas
of Kokrajhar and Bongaigaon districts. The corridor needs to be secured on an
urgent basis through protection, removal of encroachments, and restoration of
degraded and fragmented habitat to facilitate elephant movement.
318 319
6.01
Apalchand – Mahananda
This corridor connects Apalchand Reserve Forest (Baikunthapur Forest Division)

with Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary. Elephants move from Apalchand Reserve
Forest through a narrow patch near Babujote village or the area south of Gajoldoba
3D map showing the landscape of the Apalchand – Mahananda Corridor

Beat, then pass through the Gheesh River, Sonali Tea Garden, Leesh River,
Saougaon, Sundaribasti, Mongpong River, Totgaon (Teesta chaur), Ellenbari Tea
Garden and the Teesta River, and enter Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary between
Laltong and Chamukdangi. There is occasional elephant movement between the
area south of Gajoldoba Beat (Apalchand Reserve Forest) and Saraswatipur Beat
(Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary) on either side of the Teesta River.
Alternate name Teesta chaur

State West Bengal
Connectivity Apalchand RF with Mahananda WLS
Length and Width 0.5-1.5 km and 14-15 km
88° 28’ 10”- 88° 35’ 39” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Teesta Wildlife

Sanctuary
Major land use Tea Garden, Revenue Land
Major habitation/settlements Totgaon, Sundaribasti, Saougaon,
Babujote
Forest type Tropical moist deciduous forest and
sal plantation
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary
320 321
revealed that the predominant tree species is Lagerstroemia speciosa (30%),

followed by Tectona grandis (25%), Amoora wallichii (20%), Dillenia indica (10%) and
Michelia champaka (10%). Ground cover was dominated by grasses (70%); barren
ground (10%) was at a minimum. The scattered outgrowth of some tree saplings
was also observed. Among the ground vegetation, notable elephant fodder
species like Nasturtium officinale, Saccharum spontaneum, Axonopus compressus,
Saccharum narenga, Alpinia nigra and bamboo were recorded.
In Apalchand Reserve Forest the predominant species is Lagerstroemia speciosa

(41.4%), followed by Michelia champaka (17.2%), Anthocephalus chinensis (10.3%)
and Shorea robusta (6.9%). Maximum GBH was recorded in Shorea robusta (235
cm). Ground cover was mostly barren ground (70%) followed by shrubs (18%),
herbs (7%) and grasses (5%).
Map of the Apalchand – Mahananda Corridor

Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary: 100-120
Apalchand Range: 50-60
(West Bengal Elephant Census, 2015)
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical dry deciduous, tropical moist deciduous, riverine, tropical
mixed deciduous and savannah grassland forest
Settlements: Dhumsigara Forest Village, Babujote, Saougaon, Totgaon, Kalagaity,
Sundaribasti, Teesta Barrage staff quarters, labour colonies of Sonali and
Kalagaity Tea Gardens
Agriculture: Paddy, maize
Tea Estates: Odlabari, Sonali, Ellenbury, Kalagaity
Rivers: Teesta, Mongpong, Leesh and Gheesh
Roadways: NH 31 (Siliguri-Sevok) , Odlabari-Teesta Barrage road
Buildings: Gajoldoba Beat, Teesta Barrage staff quarters

Mountain Range: Eastern Himalayas
Elephant Range: Western Duars (Terai) Region
322 323
Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve Kothi line (Sonali TG) Tea Garden 450-550
Protected Area: Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary and Teesta Wildlife Sanctuary Jungle Line (Sonali Tea Tea Garden 750-850
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas Garden)
IBA: Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary (IN-WB-07), Eastern Himalayas (EBA 130) Ellenbury Tea Garden Tea Garden 2500-3000
Washabari Tea Garden 4100-4500
Kalagaity Revenue 125-150
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Kalagaity Tea Garden 900-1200
Hanskhali Revenue 650-750
Threats
Dumsigara Forest Village 40-60
1. Settlements: Encroachment along the Teesta riverbed (Totgaon) blocks the
Chamukdangi Forest Village Not known
corridor. Expansion of the Babujote and Kalagaity Tea Garden colonies is causing
Laltong Forest Village Not known
congestion in the corridor. The Teesta Barrage staff quarters are located beside
the Apalchand Reserve Forest and also hinder the free movement of elephants.
A high proportion of the inhabitants of these villages depend on the tea gardens
for their livelihood; the rest are dependent on their paddy/maize crops. There is
2. Sand and boulder mining: Mining along the Teesta River and consequent load-
high crop depredation by elephants to the villages east of the Teesta River; some
carrying vehicular traffic are threats to the corridor.
farmers have even stopped cultivating paddy/maize altogether.
3. Siliguri-Sevok-Jalpaiguri road along the river and associated vehicular traffic.

Human-Elephant Conflict
Corridor villages: Babujote, Dhumsigara

Compen-
Cases of
Name of Elephant Human Cases of sation for
property
Corridor dependent villages: Laltong Forest Village, Totgaon, 10th Mile Forest the deaths deaths human property
damage
Village, Ellenbury Tea Garden (Basa Line: 200 houses, 4 No. Line: 50 houses), forest (2003 - (2003 - injury damage
(2003-
range 2013) 2013) (2003-2013) from 2003
Sonali Tea Garden (Jungle Line: 150 houses, Kothi Line: 100 houses, Dhura Line: 2013)
- 2013 (Rs)
30 houses, Saogaon (150 houses), Totgaon (300 houses), Kalagaity (25 houses), Sukna
0 9 5 1258 718350
and Chamukdangi Forest Village. Range
South
0 6 2 27 18000
Range
The corridor has a large number of villages within the corridor and on its fringes:
West
3 3 1 2208 785905
Range
Settlement Status of Land Population (Approx.) North
3 2 11 45897
Totgaon Revenue 1400-1600 Range
Sundaribasti Revenue 150-170
Saogaon Revenue 700-750
324 325
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The West Bengal Forest Department has notified 32 sq km of corridor land on

the Teesta chaur as the Teesta Wildlife Sanctuary.
2. Construction hindering elephant movement inside the corridor area must be

prohibited.
3. Vehicular speeds should be regulated by suitable barriers on NH 31 (Siliguri-

Sevok) within the corridor area.
4. Land use change and expansion inside Sonali Tea Garden and Kalagaity Tea
Fig. 6.01: An elephant in the Mahanada corridor

Garden should be strictly prohibited.
5. Land use change on either side of the Teesta River, especially on the eastern
bank up to Teesta Barrage at Gajoldoba, should be prohibited.
6. Babujote and Dhumsigara Forest Villages could be relocated to increase the

corridor width.
7. At least 900 m north of Gajoldoba Beat Office, the area should be cleared
(Babujote, Teesta Barrage staff quarters, Dhumsigara Forest Village) to provide
safe passage for elephants to Apalchand Reserve Forest.
326 327
6.02
Apalchand – Gorumara
The Apalchand-Gorumara corridor connects the elephant population of

Gorumara National Park with Apalchand Reserve Forest. Elephants pass through
Tillabari Division (Baradighi Tea Garden), Neora River, Nichchalsa, Haihaipathar,
3D map showing the landscape of the Apalchand – Gorumara Corridor

Nipucchapur, Kumlai River, Baintbari, Damdim Tea Garden and Chel River, and
enter Apalchand Reserve Forest mostly to the north of Mechbasty Forest Village.
NH 31 is a major impediment to elephant movement. An upcoming railway track
(Mal Bazar-Lataguri) also poses a threat to elephant movement.
Alternate name Lower Tondu-Apalchand

State West Bengal
Connectivity Apalchand Reserve Forest with
Gorumara National Park
Length and Width 13-15 km and 0-2 km
88° 40’ 30”-88° 48’ 39” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Forest Land leased to

Tea Gardens, Patta Land
Major land use Tea Garden, agriculture, settlements,
road and railway
Major habitation/settlements Baintbari, Colonies of Baradighi Tea
Garden, Damdim Tea Garden
Forest type Tropical moist deciduous
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; peak during May-July and
October-March
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in the Apalchand Reserve Forest

reveals that the predominant tree species are Shorea robusta (60%), Tectona
328 329
grandis (15%) and Lagerstroemia speciosa (10%). Maximum GBH was recorded in
Shorea robusta (300 cm). The ground cover in Apalchand comprised shrubs (30%),
herbs (40%) and grasses (5%), with about 20% as barren ground.
In Gorumara National Park, the predominant tree species are Shorea robusta
(75%), followed by Amoora rohituka (7%), Amoora wallichii (7%) and Dillenia
pentagyna (4%). Ground cover in Gorumara was dominated by shrubs (60%)
followed by grasses (30%) and herbs (8%), with the rest as barren ground.

Gorumara National Park and Chapramari WIldlife Sanctuary: 50-60
Targhera Range: 20-25
Map of the Apalchand – Gorumara Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical moist deciduous
Settlements: Nichchalsa, Nipucchapur, Kantadighi Kumarpara, Baintbari,
Chhaoaphali, Magurmari Forest Village (FV), Gorumara FV I, Gorumara FV II,
Labour colonies of Baradighi Tea Garden (Tillabari Division), Damdim Tea Garden
Agriculture: Maize, paddy
Tea Estates: Baradighi (Tillabari Division), Damdim, Nipucchapur
Rivers: Neora, Chel, Kumlai
Roadways: NH 31 (Chalsa-Lataguri), Mal Bazar-Kranti Road
Railway: Upcoming Mal Bazar-Jalpaiguri broad gauge railway track
Buildings: Factories of Baradighi Tea Garden (Tillabari Division), Damdim Tea
Garden, Nipucchapur Tea Garden

Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Gorumara National Park
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas
IBA: Gorumara National Park (IN-WB-03), Eastern Himalayas (EBA 130)
330 331
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Chhaoaphali Revenue Not known

Targhera Revenue 800-1000
Threats Odlabari TG Tea Garden 4400-4800
1. Anthropogenic: The increasing human population has congested the already Kumlai TG Tea Garden 4200-4500
narrow corridor. The choice of paddy or maize as the primary crops has increased Kantadighi Kumarpara Revenue 3200-3700
human-elephant conflict in the area. Labour line colonies and non-elephant
friendly practices in the tea gardens are the main causes of disturbance. The majority of people in these villages depend on the tea gardens for their
livelihood. Many of the corridor villages have started cultivating tea instead of
2. People’s dependency on corridor forest: The village communities are highly paddy or maize due to crop depredation by elephants.
dependent on the forest for fuelwood and fodder for their cattle.
3. Railway track: A broad-gauge railway line connecting Mal Bazar to Jalpaiguri is CONSERVATION PLAN
under construction and a serious threat to elephant movement.
4. National Highway 31 and associated vehicular traffic. department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent
encroachment and developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
Corridor villages: Baintbari, labour colonies of Baradighi Tea Garden and Damdim
Tea Garden. 2. Elephant movement from the southwest of Gorumara National Park should
be restricted and elephant movement from the northern part of Gorumara to
Corridor dependent villages: Kantadighi Kumrapara, Mechbasty Forest Village Apalchand Reserve Forest channelised through Damdim Tea Garden. Similarly
(45-60 houses), Chhaoaphali, Nichchalsa, Nipucchapur, Damdim Tea Garden, the southeastern part of Apalchand Reserve Forest needs to be blocked so that
Haihaipathar, Odlabari Tea Garden, Kumlai Tea Garden. elephants move from the north.
Settlement Status of land Population (Approx.) 3. Vehicular speeds should be regulated by the use of suitable physical barriers
Tillabari Division Tea Garden 4000-4500 on NH 31 (Chalsa-Lataguri), which passes through the corridor area. Suitable
(Baradighi Tea Garden) barriers along the highway (on the western side of Gorumara National Park)
Damdim Tea Garden Tea Garden 7300-7700 south of Kantadighi Kumarpara could prevent conflict and channelise elephant
movement from the northern part of Gorumara.
Haihaipathar Revenue 5700-6000
Nipucchapur Revenue 2200-2500 4. Land use change inside Baradighi Tea Garden (Tillabari Division) and Damdim
Nipuchhapur Tea Tea Garden 2700-3000 Tea Garden should be strictly prohibited.
Garden
Nichchalsa Revenue 3000-3500
332 333
5. Relocate the labour quarters of Baradighi Tea Garden (Tillabari Division) and
the adjoining forest village near Neora River to facilitate unhindered elephant
movement.
6. Artificial water ponds situated south of Tillabari Division need to be relocated

deep inside the forest to prevent animals from straying.
7. Local communities from Nichchalsa, Nipucchapur, Baradighi Tea Garden

(Tillabari Division), Damdim Tea Garden (Barron Division), Kantadighi Kumrapara,
Chhaoaphali and forest villages, as well as the tea garden owners, need to be
sensitised about the negative effects of corridor constriction.
8. Appropriate mitigation measures (including an Animal Detection System near
Fig. 6.02: Flood plains of the Chel River

the railway track) are needed to minimise the impact that the new railway line
passing through corridor will have on animal movement.
334 335
6.03
Apalchand – Kalimpong at Mal Block
(Via Sylee)
3D map showing the landscape of the Apalchand – Kalimpong at Mal Block (via Sylee) Corridor
This corridor connects Apalchand Reserve Forest (Baikanthapur Forest Division)
with Mal Block (Kalimpong Forest Division). Elephants from Apalchand Reserve
Forest cross the Chel River east of Targhera Forest Beat Office, then move through
the Damdim, Kumlai and Baintbari Tea Gardens, the Odlabari-Damdim railway
line, NH 31 (Odlabari-Damdim), Ranichera and Sylee Tea Gardens, and enter Mal
forest near Bhuttabari Forest Village. The army areas here considerably reduce
the width of the corridor. Elephants often use the adjoining Meenglass route to
move to Bhuttabari forest due to high disturbance in this corridor.
Alternate name Apalchand-Bhuttabari

State West Bengal
Connectivity Mal Block (Kalimpong Forest Division)
with Apalchand Reserve Forest
Length and Width 14-17 km and 0-1.5 km
88° 36’ 40”- 88° 42’ 18” E
Legal status Revenue Land, Reserve Forest, Tea

Gardens
Major land use Agriculture, tea gardens, roads,
railways and settlements
Major habitation/settlements Damdimhat, Colonies of Sylee
Tea Garden, Damdim Tea Garden,
Ranichera Tea Garden
Forest type Moist deciduous forest, plantation
forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal, during June-July and
October-February
336 337
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in the Bhuttabari Reserve Forest

(Kalimpong Forest Division) revealed that the predominant tree species are
Lagerstroemia speciosa (43.8%), Tectona grandis (37.5%), Canarium sikkimense
(12.5%) and Anthocephalus chinensis (6.2%). Maximum GBH and height was
observed in Tectona grandis (130 cm) and Canarium sikkimense (45 m) respectively.
In Apalchand Reserve Forest, the predominant tree species are Shorea robusta
(30.8%), Lagerstroemia parviflora (23.8%), Crataeva unilocularis (7.7%), Garuga
Map of the Apalchand – Kalimpong at Mal Block (via Sylee) Corridor

pinnata (7.7%), Stereospermum tetragonum (7.7%), Bischofia javanica (7.7%),
Tetrameles nudiflora (7.7%) and Amoora wallichii (7.7%). Maximum GBH and height
was recorded in Shorea robusta – 320 cm and 45 m respectively.
Ground cover of Apalchand was dominated by shrubs (30%), herbs (40%), grasses
(5%) and barren ground. Ground cover of Bhuttabari was dominated by shrubs
(50%), grasses (15%), herbs (10%) and barren ground (25%).

Gorumara NP & Chapramari WLS: 50-60
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical mixed dry deciduous, tropical moist deciduous forest,
plantations
Settlements: Bhuttabari Forest Village Targhera, 8 No. Village, Bhuttabari Forest
Village, Labour colonies of Odlabari, Baintbari, Sylee, Ranichera and Meenglass
Tea Gardens
Agriculture: Maize, ragi, paddy, betel leaf plantations
Tea Estates: Odlabari Tea Garden, Damdim Tea Garden, Baintbari Tea Garden,
Ranichera Tea Garden, Sylee Tea Garden, Meenglass Tea Garden
Rivers: Chel River
Railway track: Odlabari-Damdim
Roadways: NH 31 (Odlabari-Damdim), Damdim-Gorubathan road
338 339
Other ecological importance agricultural activities. The Chel Line (250 houses) and Factory Line (320 houses)
Elephant Range: Western Duars (Terai) Region of Sylee Tea Garden, and the labour quarters of Ranichera Tea Garden block the
Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve corridor. People are likely to relocate if they are provided with adequate facilities.
Protected Area: Gorumara National Park and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary
Biodiversity Hotspot Region: Eastern Himalayas Settlement Status of Land Population (Approx.)
Damdim Tea Garden Tea Garden 7300-7600
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Ranichera Tea Garden Tea Garden 4900-5200
Baintbari Sylee Tea Garden 1300-1500
Threats Targhera Revenue 800-900
1. Anthropogenic pressure: Expansion of tea gardens and their labour quarters Odlabari Tea Garden Tea Garden 4400-4600
constrict the corridor. Villagers are dependent on the forest mostly for fuelwood. Damdimhat Revenue 2900-3200
These factors have increased human-elephant conflict in the region. Sailihat/ Khasjangal-I Revenue & Khas 1400-1600
8 No. Basti Khas Land 350-400
2. Buildings/Artefacts: Targhera Army Camp, Damdim Army Camp, Sylee Tea Manpari Forest Village 45-50
Garden factory, Ranichera Tea Garden factory, Border Roads Organisation activity Bhuttabari/ Special Forest Village 250-350
area and camp, Bhuttabari saw mill, Bhuttabari forest beat, Ranichera Golf Club Chiklabasti/ Khasjangal-II Khas & Revenue 55-65
Sylee Tea Garden Tea Garden 4500-5000
3. Army settlement: Army settlements and their activity areas (eg, a firing range)
disturb elephant movement.
CONSERVATION PLAN
4. Railway traffic: On average, 1.6 trains per hour ply from 6 am to 6 pm, and 0.9
trains per hour ply from 6 pm to 6 am. 1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
5. National Highway 31: Heavy vehicular traffic on this highway is a threat to the encroachment and developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
movement of elephants.
2. Train frequency should be reduced at least during the night (8 pm to 5 am) by
Corridor villages: Damdimhat, Colonies of Sylee Tea Garden, Damdim Tea diverting the trains from New Jalpaiguri Junction towards Falakata.
Garden, Ranichera Tea Garden.
3. Night patrolling of the railway track passing through the corridor is essential
Corridor dependent villages: Damdim Tea Garden (Khagrabasti, BT Line, Barron during the elephant migratory season (October to March). Installing an Animal
Division), Damdimhat, Sylee Tea Garden, Ranichera Tea Garden, Baintbari Tea Detection System near the track to alert train drivers will also help.
Garden, Chiklabasti, Sailihat.
4. Vehicular speeds should be regulated in the corridor area at night by suitable
While most of the inhabitants are tea garden labourers, the rest are engaged in barriers on NH 31 (Odlabari-Damdim) and the Damdim-Gorubathan road.
340 341
5. Restore habitat in the Bhuttabari forest fringes, especially between Chel River
and Meenglass Tea Garden - Bhuttabari Forest Village to provide canopy cover for
the safe passage of elephants.
6. Labour colonies of Ranichera Tea Garden and Sylee Tea Garden, and settlements
north of NH 31 could be protected by suitable barriers (fencing, light etc) to reduce
human-elephant conflict and prevent retaliation against elephants (pragmatic
solution). These colonies and settlements could also be rehabilitated to a safe
place in consultation with the respective tea garden owners and inhabitants, with
suitable relocation packages provided (ideal solution).
7. Land use change inside Odlabari, Ranichera, Sylee and Damdim Tea Gardens
should be strictly prohibited.
8. Sensitise people from Damdimhat and Targhera, and the various tea garden
Fig. 6.03: Ranichera Tea Garden
owners, about the negative effects of corridor constriction. Provide do’s and
don’t’s in corridor areas as part of an overall campaign for tea garden owners.
9. Expansion of villages, especially ancillary settlements near the Border Roads

Organisation camp should be prohibited at the earliest.
10. Sensitise the army about the importance of the corridor and prevent activities
that may hinder elephant movement.
Fig. 6.04: Army Compartment at Damdim
342 343
6.04
Apalchand – Kalimpong at Mal Block
(Via Meenglass)
3D map showing the landscape of the Apalchand – Kalimpong at Mal Block (via Meenglass) Corridor
This corridor facilitates elephant movement from Apalchand Reserve Forest

(Baikuntapur Forest Division) to Mal Block (Bhuttabari Forest, Kalimpong Forest
Division). Elephants pass through the Targhera Forest Range area and cross the
Chel River (east of Targhera), and the Damdim, Kumlai, Goodhope, Rungamuttee,
Dalingkote and Meenglass Tea Gardens to move between the habitats. National
Highway 31 (Odlabari-Mal) and the Siliguri-Alipurduar railway line are the major
impediments to elephant movement.
Alternate name Apalchand-Bhuttabari

State West Bengal
Connectivity Mal Block with Apalchand Reserve
Forest
88° 39’ 7”-88° 45’ 6”E
Legal status Revenue Land, Forest Land, Tea

Garden
Major land use Forest, plantation, tea garden, army
compartment, road and railway line
Major habitation/settlements Chiklabasti, Sylee Hat and labour
colonies of Damdim, Kumlai,
Rungamuttee, Dalingkote and
Meenglass Tea Gardens
Forest type Tropical dry to moist deciduous forest
344 345
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in the Bhuttabari Reserve Forest

(Kalimpong Forest Division) revealed that the predominant tree species are
Lagerstroemia speciosa (43.8%), Tectona grandis (37.5%), Canarium sikkimense
(12.5%) and Anthocephalus chinensis (6.2%). Maximum GBH and height was
observed in Tectona grandis (130 cm) and Canarium sikkimense (45 m) respectively.
Vegetation sampling in 0.04 ha of Apalchand Reserve Forest revealed that the
predominant tree species are Shorea robusta (30.8%), Lagerstroemia parviflora
Map of the Apalchand – Kalimpong at Mal Block (via Meenglass) Corridor

(23.8%), Crataeva unilocularis (7.7%), Garuga pinnata (7.7%), Stereospermum
tetragonum (7.7%), Bischofia javanica (7.7%), Tetrameles nudiflora (7.7%) and Amoora
wallichii (7.7%). Maximum GBH and height was recorded in Shorea robusta: 320 cm
and 45 m respectively.
Ground cover of Bhuttabari Reserve Forest was dominated by shrubs (50%),

grasses (15%) and herbs (10%) with the rest as barren ground (25%). Ground
cover of Apalchand Reserve Forest was dominated by shrubs (30%), herbs (40%)
and grasses (5%), with the rest as barren ground.

Apalchand Reserve Forest: 50-60
Gorumara National Park & Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary: 50-60
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical dry forest, tropical moist deciduous forest and tea garden
Settlements: Khasjungle (Chiklabasti), Damdimhat, and quarters of Damdim, Kumlai,
Baintguri, Good Hope, Rungamutte, Meenglass and Dalingkote Tea Gardens
Agriculture: Maize, paddy, betel leaf plantations
Tea Estates: Odlabari, Damdim, Kumlai, Baintbari, Rungamuttee, Goodhope,
Dalingkote, Meenglass
Rivers: Chel, Kumlai nullah, Chaiti nullah
Roadways: NH 31, Damdim-Gorubathan road
Railway track: Damdim-New Mal Jn
346 347
Other ecological importance Corridor villages: Chiklabasti, Sylee Hat, Labour colonies of Damdim, Kumlai,
Mountain Range: Eastern Himalayas Rungamuttee, Dalingkote and Meenglass Tea Gardens.
Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve Corridor dependent villages: Damdimhat, Damdim Army Camp, Gurjangjhora Tea
Protected Area: Gorumara National Park Garden, Bhuttabari Forest Village Odlabari Tea Garden.
People in the area mostly depend on tea cultivation for their livelihood. A few of
the village communities that reside outside the tea garden area are mainly farmers
HUMAN DIMENSIONS or businessmen. Most people have a favourable disposition towards relocation to
safeguard the corridor, as indicated during the initial survey.
Threats
1. Habitation and settlements: Expansion of corridor villages, namely Damdimhat
Settlement Status of land Population
and the labour colonies of Rungamuttee Tea Garden, Nedeem Division (Sylee
Chayabasa Line Rungamuttee Tea Garden 1000-1200
Tea Garden), Barron Division (Sylee Tea Garden), Meenglass Tea Garden and
Gate Line Rungamuttee Tea Garden 20-30
Damdim Tea Garden has narrowed the corridor, hindering elephant movement.
Damdim Tea Garden Tea Garden 7300-7600
The presence of buildings like a Buddhist monastery, Targhera Army Camp and
Baintbari (Barron Div) Sylee Tea Garden 1300-1500
Rungamuttee Army Camp has added to the disturbance.
Targhera Revenue Land 800-900
Odlabari Tea Garden Tea Garden 4400-4600
2. Grazing and fuelwood: The increased livestock population and the extraction of
Damdimhat Revenue Land 2900-3200
fodder and fuelwood from the corridor forest has affected the habitat as well as
Sailihat / Khasjangal-I Revenue & Khas 1400-1600
elephant movement.
8 No. Basti Khas Land 350-400
Manpari Forest Village 45-50
3. High-tension electric lines: Power lines pass through the corridor and the sagging
Bhuttabari / Special Forest Village 250-350
of these high-tension wires could pose a threat to elephants.
Chikla basti / Khasjangal-II Khas & Revenue Land 55-65
Sylee Tea Garden Tea Garden 4500-5000
4. Army compartment: Army activity areas are an impediment to safe elephant
Rungamuttee Tea Garden Tea Garden 8000-9000
movement. Kumlai Tea Garden Tea Garden 4200-4500
5. Railway traffic: On average, 1.6 trains per hour run from 6 am to 6 pm and 0.9 CONSERVATION PLAN
trains per hour from 6 pm to 6 am, hindering the free movement of elephants.
6. National Highway 31 (Mal-Siliguri): The heavy vehicular traffic on this highway department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent
hinders elephant movement. encroachment and developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
348 349
2. Train frequency should be reduced during the night (8 pm to 5 am) by diverting

the trains from New Jalpaiguri Junction towards Falakata.
3. Night patrolling on the railway track passing through the corridor during the
elephant migratory season (October to March) will help minimise elephant deaths
due to train-hits. Installing an Animal Detection System near the track to alert train
drivers will also help.
4. The expansion of the tea garden labour colonies of Damdim, Meenglass,

Rungamuttee and Nedeem Division (Sylee Tea Garden) should be prevented.
These colonies should be suitably fenced to prevent the entry of elephants and
minimise conflict.
Fig. 6.05: Gumpha and the adjoining Chiklabasti

5. Vehicular speeds on NH 31 (Odlabari-Damdim) and the Damdim-Gorubathan
road should be regulated at night by suitable barriers.
6. The expansion of existing army camps or the construction of new camps must
be prohibited inside the corridor area.
7. In consultation with tea estate owners, the labour lines adjoining the Rungamutte
Tea Garden factory and the labour colonies of Nedeem Division of Sylee Tea
Garden could be relocated to facilitate safe passage of elephants. Alternatives
must also be found for 8 No. Basti, which is an encroachment. Until then, the
labour lines should be suitably fenced off.
350 351
6.05
Chapramari - Kalimpong (Mal block)
3D map showing the landscape of the Chapramari - Kalimpong (Mal Block) Corridor
This corridor facilitates elephant movement between the Mal Block of Kalimpong
Forest Division and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary of Wildlife Division II. From
Chapramari, elephants cross the Murti River near Sardi Line and move between
Kilkote and Indong Tea Gardens. After crossing the Chalsa-Matiale road, they pass
through the Juranti and Nagaisuree Tea Gardens and cross the Neora River to
enter Bhuttabari near Mal-4 Forest Village and Nakti Tea Garden. On occasion
they go beyond Nakti and Sonagachi Tea Gardens to Gurjhanjhora and Meenglass
Tea Gardens to enter the Mal Block.
Alternate name Chapramari-Bhuttabari

State West Bengal
Connectivity Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary with
Mal Reserve Forest
88° 45’ 28”- 88° 50’ 28” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Forest Lands

leased to Tea Gardens
Major land use Tea gardens, settlements
Major habitation/settlements Tea garden colonies of Aibheel,
Zurrantee, Nagaisuree
Forest type Tropical moist deciduous, riparian
Corridor habitat status: Tree density was very low (75 trees per ha) in the sampled
352 353
areas of Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary and Kalimpong forest (Bhuttabari Reserve

Forest). The predominant tree species are Amoora wallichii (33.3%), Tetrameles
nudiflora (33.3%) and Terminallia belerica (33.3%). Maximum GBH and height was
recorded in T nudiflora: 320 cm and 45 m respectively. Ground cover in Chapramari
was dominated by shrubs ( 50%), grasses (30%), herbs (15%) and barren ground
(5%). In Kalimpong (Bhuttabari Forest), ground cover was dominated by shrubs
(65%) followed by grasses (30%), herbs (3%) and barren ground (2%).

Gorumara National Park and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary: 68
Map of the Chapramari - Kalimpong (Mal Block) Corridor

Kalimpong Forest Division: 8
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical moist deciduous forest, riparian forest
Settlements: Special Forest Village, tea garden labour colonies of Kilkote, Indong,
Nagaisuree, Zurrantee, Aibeel and Nakhati
Agriculture: Paddy, betel nut plantations, maize
Tea Estates: Kilkote, Indong, Nagaisuree, Zurrantee, Aibeel and Nakhati Tea Gardens
Rivers: Murti, Neora, Mal khola
Roadways: Chalsa-Matiali road, Gorubathan road
Buildings: Murti River watch tower, Zurrantee tea garden manager’s bungalow, tea
garden factories of Kilkote, Aibeel and Zurrantee

Protected Area: Gorumara National Park and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary
Biodiversity Hotspot region: Eastern Himalayas
IBA: Gorumara National Park (IN-WB-03), Eastern Himalayas (EBA 130)
354 355
HUMAN DIMENSIONS tea gardens. High human-elephant conflict is a problem in the area. Farmers have
stopped cultivating paddy and maize due to crop depredation.
Threats
1. Anthropogenic: Expanding settlements inside the corridor pose a threat.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Increased dependency on the forest for fuelwood and cattle fodder has degraded
nearby forest areas.
protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and developmental
2. Habitat deterioration: Depletion of forest cover is a threat to the corridor as
activities detrimental to animal movement.
passing elephants doesn’t get food or shade.
2. Habitat should be restored in the Mal Block of Bhuttabari Reserve Forest

3. Tea gardens: Tea gardens and labour lines have narrowed down the effective
between the Mal and Neora Rivers.
width of the corridor.
3. Expansion of the Kunja (Kilkote Tea Garden) and Amba Chopal (Indong Tea
Corridor villages: Labour lines of Indong (Amba Chopal), Aibheel (Girja, Gajoldoba,
Garden) labour lines as well as Matiali village should be prevented. If possible the
Mongra), Kilkote (Kunja, 11 No. Line), Nagaisuree (Bara Line, 22 No.Line), Nakhati,
corridor area should be declared as an eco-sensitive zone.
and Zurrantee (Kaka, Damba, Del, Factory, Neora, Damu) Tea Gardens.
4. Special Forest Village, labour lines of Mongra Tea Garden, labour colonies of
Corridor dependent Villages: Matiali, Chalsa Tea Garden, Indong Tea Garden,
Aibheel Tea Garden, and the Del and Damu labour colonies of Zurrantee Tea
Sathkaya Tea Garden, Mal Forest Village.
Garden should be protected by suitable barriers. They could also be relocated In
consultation with stakeholders.
Settlement Status of land Population
Indong Tea Garden 6500-7000
5. No new construction should be permitted inside the corridor area, especially
Aibheel Tea Garden 4200-4700
between the Kunja Line (Kilkote Tea Garden) and Amba Chopal (Indong Tea
Zurrantee Tea Garden 3000-3500
Garden) labour colonies, and between Special Forest VIllage and Neora Line
Nagaisuree Tea Garden 4800-5500
(Zurrantee Tea Garden).
Kilkote Tea Garden 4100-4500
Special Forest Village 500-650
Nakhati Tea Garden 3900-4300
Matiali Revenue Land 4200-4600
Settlements inside the corridor depend upon the forest mainly for fuelwood,
NTFP, land for agriculture and fodder for their cattle. As most of the corridor lands
include tea gardens, the inhabitants here are mainly labourers in the respective
356 357
6.06
Rethi - Moraghat
This corridor in Jalpaiguri Forest Division connects Rethi Reserve Forest with
Moraghat Reserve Forest and passes mainly through tea gardens (Karbala,
Banarhat, Gandrapara and Moraghat). Elephants enter Moraghat Reserve Forest
through the Gairkata Range near Totapara Beat. They cross National Highway 31
3D map showing the landscape of the Rethi - Moraghat Corridor

near the Kalibari railway crossing.
State West Bengal

Connectivity Rethi Reserve Forest with Moraghat
Reserve Forest under Jalpaiguri Forest
Division
88° 59’ 56”- 89° 6’ 5” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Revenue Land, Forest

Land leased to Tea Gardens
Major land use Agriculture, tea garden
Major habitation/settlements Tea garden labour lines of Karbala,
Kothi Line (Banarhat), Moraghat
Forest type Tropical moist deciduous forest and
tea gardens
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal and regular
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in Rethi Reserve Forest revealed

that the predominant species are Trewia nudiflora (57.2%), Amoora wallichii
(21.4%) and Cassia siamea (21.4%). Maximum GBH and height was recorded in
Trewia nudiflora: 400 cm and 45 m respectively. Sampling in Moraghat Reserve
358 359
Forest revealed that the predominant tree species is Shorea robusta (36.4%),
followed by Tectona grandis (18.2%), Lagerstroemia speciosa (18.2%), Amoora
wallichii (18.2%) and Artocarpus chaplasha (9.1%). Maximum GBH and height
was recorded in Artocarpus chaplasha and Shorea robusta respectively. Ground
cover was dominated by shrubs (35%), herbs (15%), grasses (10%) and barren
ground (40%). Elephant food species like Cassia siamea, Artocarpus chaplasha and
Lagerstroemia speciosa were also recorded in the corridor area.

Jaldapara National Park: 65-75
Gorumara National Park and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary: 50-60
Map of the Rethi - Moraghat Corridor

Forest/Land use
Settlements: Tea garden labour lines of Karbala, Banarhat, Gandrapara, Moraghat
Agriculture: Maize, wheat, paddy
Tea Estates: Karbala, Banarhat, Gandrapara, Moraghat, Jaybirpara, Dheklapara,
Rahimpur, Telepara, Sarugaon
Rivers: Rethi River
Roads & Railways: National Highway 31C (Madarihat-Chalsa), DBITA road,
Chamurchi road (Banarhat-Chamurchi-Samtse), Siliguri-Alipurduar ralway line
Buildings: Binnaguri Army Compartment, High School, St. James High School, Duars
branch of Indian Tea Association Office, factories of Karbala, Rheabari, Banarhat,
Moraghat and Huldibari Tea Gardens.

Elephant Range: Central Duars (Terai) Region
Protected Area: Gorumara National Park
360 361
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Rs 19-20 lakh per annum for crop depredation, damage to houses and livestock
deaths. More than 50% of the human deaths and property damage caused by
Threats elephants have occurred near the periphery of Rethi Reserve Forest.
1. An army compartment has partially blocked the elephant corridor and the
presence of a firing range has further threatened elephant movement.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Tea gardens: The labour lines and factories of Karbala and Moraghat Tea Gardens
have reduced the width of the corridor. 1. The corridor should be notified and legally protected by the state forest
3. Railway traffic: Several elephants have died in train-hit incidents in the Banarhat- encroachment and developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
Carron stretch. On average, 1.6 trains per hour run between 6 am and 6 pm, and
0.9 trains per hour between 6 pm and 6 am, threatening elephant movement. 2. The ground surface on either side of the railway track between pole numbers
97/5 and 97/7 should be levelled to facilitate elephant movement. An overpass
4. Roadways: Two major roads, NH 31C (Banarhat-Telepara) and the DBITA road for the railway line will be the most viable option facilitating elephant movement
(Banarhat-Gairkata), pass through the corridor. Day traffic (6 am to 6 pm) was below.
recorded at 344.8 vehicles per hour, while the traffic between 6 pm and 6 am was
116.2 vehicles per hour. 3. The frequency of trains should be reduced at night (8 pm to 5 am) by diverting
the trains from New Jalpaiguri Junction towards the Falakata route.
Corridor villages: Karbala (3500-3800 people), Nepania (1000-1100 people),
Kalapani (330-370 people) and Moraghat (3000-3500 people). 4. Night patrolling should be initiated on the railway track passing through the
corridor during the elephant migratory season (October to March). Installation of
Most of the inhabitants find their employment in the tea gardens that dominate an Animal Detection System on the track to alert train drivers will also help.
the area. The inhabitants of revenue villages are either farmers or businessmen.
5. No new construction that obstructs elephant movement should be permitted
Residents of Rheabari, Karbala, Huldibari and Moraghat Tea Gardens are willing inside the corridor area, especially between the southern portion of the Bel Line
to relocate if provided with better facilities. This could be planned in consultation (Karbala Tea Garden) and the Binnaguri Army Compartment and firing range. The
with tea garden owners and managers. labour lines of Karbala, Moraghat and Banarhat Tea Gardens could be power
fenced to prevent conflict. The option of voluntary relocation of these settlements
Corridor dependent villages: Huldibari, Binnaguri and Garganda Tea Gardens, could also be explored as a permanent solution.
Binnaguri Army Compartment, Nepania, Kalapani, Sishu-Jhumra and Sarugaon.
6. A college is under construction within the corridor, just 400 metres down
Human-Elephant Conflict: Data from the Jalpaiguri Forest Division between 2005 from the Binnaguri railway level crossing. This will further contrict the corridor,
and 2014 indicates an average of eight to nine human deaths caused annually hindering elephant movement. This area should be secured.
by elephants, five to six elephant deaths per year, and ex-gratia support of about
362 363
6.07
Rethi – Central Diana
This corridor serves as the major connectivity between Rethi Reserve Forest
and Central Diana Reserve Forest, and onwards to Gorumara National Park.
Elephants pass through the tea garden areas of Palashbari, Kathalguri, New
3D map showing the landscape of the Rethi – Central Diana Corridor

Dooars, Haritalguri and Choona Bhutti. At Diana River, they take two routes: most
of them pass to the north of Red Bank Tea Garden, under the Diana Railway /
Roadway Bridge to enter Diana Reserve Forest; others pass to the south of Red
Bank Tea Garden, crossing the road between Debpara Tea Garden and Red Bank
Tea Garden. Major impediments to elephant movement are the Binnaguri Army
Compartment with its nearby firing range, and high vehicular and railway traffic.
State West Bengal

Connectivity Rethi Reserve Forest with Central
Diana Reserve Forest
88° 59’ 41”- 89° 6’ 3” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Forest Lands leased to

Tea Gardens, Government-owned
Major land use Tea gardens, settlements, roads,
railways
Major habitation/settlements Nepania, Kalapani, Prayagpur and tea
garden labour colonies
Forest type Tropical deciduous forest, sal and teak
forest
Corridor habitat status: Tree density was recorded as 350 trees per ha in the
364 365
Rethi Reserve Forest. The predominant tree species were Trewia nudiflora (57.2%),
Amoora wallichii (21.4%) and Cassia siamea (21.4%). Maximum GBH was recorded
in Tectona grandis (400 cm).
In the sampled area (0.04 ha) of Diana Reserve Forest, the tree density was
estimated as 400 trees per ha. The predominant species were Tectona grandis
(62.5%), Bombax ceiba (18.75%), Acacia catechu (12.5%) and Terminalia muriocarpa
(6.3%). Maximum GBH was observed in Tectona grandis (175 cm). Ground cover
was dominated by barren ground (40%), followed by shrubs (35%), herbs (15%)
and grasses (10%).

Map of the Rethi – Central Diana Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical deciduous, sal forest
Settlements: Nepania Forest Village, Kalapani Forest Village, Prayagpur village,
labour colonies of Rheabari, Kathalguri, New Dooars, Palashbari, Diana, and Red
Bank Tea Gardens
Agriculture: Maize, paddy, potato, jute
Tea Estates: Rheabari, Kathalguri, Haritalguri, Choona Bhutti, Aambari, New Dooars,
Palashbari, Diana, and Red Bank Tea Gardens
Rivers: Rethi River, Diana River
Road: National Highway 31C, Chamurchi road (Banarhat-Chamurchi-Samtse)
Railway Line: Siliguri-Alipurduar
Buildings: Tea garden factories of Rheabari, Kathalguri, New Dooars, Palashbari,
Diana and Red Bank

Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elelphant Reserve
366 367
Protected Area: Gorumara National Park Most of the people interviewed expressed their support for any relocation plan in
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas the belief that this would reduce conflict with elephants.
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Locality Status of land Population

Nepania Forest Village 1000-1100
Threats
Kalapani Forest Village 330-370
1. Artefacts: Factories and labour lines of Kathalguri, New Dooars, Haritalguri, Red
Rheabari Tea Garden 5200-6000
Bank, Aambari and Diana Tea Gardens hinder elephant movement.
Haritalguri Tea Garden 2900-3300
New Dooars Tea Garden 2600-2800
2. Army: The firing range of the Binnaguri Army Compartment near the corridor
Prayagpur Revenue Village 100-150 inside corridor
threatens elephant movement due to noise and air pollution.
Kathalguri Tea Garden 5200-5800
Red Bank Tea Garden 4000-4500
3. Road traffic: Vehicular traffic is one of the major threats to the free movement
Diana Tea Garden 3100-3500
of elephants in this corridor. A peak traffic intensity of 366 vehicles per hour

was recorded on NH 31C between Binnaguri and Chalsa from 5 pm to 6 pm. On
Human-Elephant Conflict: Data from the Jalpaiguri Forest Division between 2005
average, 286.1 vehicles per hour plied between 6 am and 6 pm, and 86.3 vehicles
and 2014 indicates an average of eight to nine human deaths caused annually
per hour plied between 6 pm and 6 am.
by elephants, five to six elephant deaths per year, and ex-gratia support of about
Rs 19-20 lakh per annum for crop depredation, damage to houses and livestock
4. Railway traffic: Several elephants have been killed due to train-hit incidents in
deaths. More than 50% of the human deaths and property damage caused by
the stretch between Banarhat and Carron in recent years. On average, 1.6 trains
elephants have occurred near the periphery of Rethi Reserve Forest.
per hour run between 6 am and 6 pm, and 0.9 trains per hour run between 6 pm
and 6 am, posing a severe threat to free movement of elephants. CONSERVATION PLAN
Corridor villages: Nepania, Kalapani, Prayagpur; tea garden labour colonies of 1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and legally
Red Bank, Rheabari, Palasbari and Karbolla. protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and developmental
Corridor dependent villages: Tea garden labour colonies of Aambari, Debpara
and Choona Bhutti. 2. The ground surface on either side of the railway track between pole number
86/2 and 86/3 should be levelled to facilitate elephant movement.
The forest villages and the revenue villages located inside the corridor are mostly
dependent on the nearby forest areas for fuelwood, NTFP, agricultural land and 3. Train frequency should be reduced at night (8 pm to 5 am) by diverting trains
cattle grazing. Most inhabitants are labourers in the tea gardens that dominate from New Jalpaiguri Junction towards the Falakata route.
the area. Most of them complained of escalating crop depredation by elephants,
and some have stopped paddy/maize farming due to the severity of the issue. 4. Night patrolling should be initiated on the railway track passing through the
368 369
corridor during the elephant migratory season (October to March). An Animal

Detection System (ADS) should be installed along critical sections of the track to
detect elephant movement and alert train drivers.
5. Expansion of the Red Bank labour line should be controlled.
6. Vehicular speeds should be controlled at night on NH 31C by suitable physical

barriers.
7. In consultation with the stakeholders, labour lines of Palashbari Tea Gardens

could be relocated by providing suitable rehabilitation packages.
8. Settlements of the Kathalguri, New Dooars, Haritalguri, Diana and Red Bank
Tea Gardens could be fenced off with suitable barriers to prevent conflict as well
Fig. 6.06: Diana River
as expansion in the corridor area. These settlements could also be relocated to
alternative sites in consultation with the villagers and tea garden management.
9. Afforestation in the Kathalguri, Palashbari, Aambari, Red Bank, Diana and

Choona Bhutti areas would facilitate safe passage for elephants.
10. No new construction should be permitted inside the corridor, especially

between the Kathalguri-Rheabari-Karbala Tea Garden settlements.
Fig. 6.07: Red Bank Tea Garden Factory
370 371
6.08
Titi – Rethi via Dumchi
This corridor links Titi Reserve Forest (the northern part of Jaldapara National
Park; Wildlife Division III) with Rethi Reserve forest (Jalpaiguri Forest Division),
passing through Dumchi Reserve Forest. Elephants cross the Titi River to enter a
3D map showing the landscape of the Titi – Rethi via Dumchi Corridor
small patch of forest (Holong). They cross the Madarihat-Totopara road between
Jamtola Bazar and Hantupara Bara Line and reach Dumchi Reserve Forest, passing
through Mujnai and Hantupara Tea Gardens. From Dumchi the elephants pass
through Gopalpur and Singhania Tea Gardens and enter Rethi Reserve Forest
either through the north or the south of Dalmore Garo Basti.
State West Bengal

Connectivity Titi Reserve Forest with Rethi
Reserve Forest via Dumchi Reserve
Forest (Jaldapara National Park with
Gorumara National Park)
89° 8’ 34”- 89° 17’ 14” E

Major land use Agriculture, tea gardens, forest and
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Dalmore Garo Basti, Hantupara,
Samsing and Gumpha Tea Garden
labour quarters, Beldanga
Forest type East Himalayan moist mixed
deciduous
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal and regular, but mostly by
bulls and small herds
372 373
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in Dumchi Reserve Forest revealed

that the predominant tree species were Shorea robusta (71%), Terminalia bellerica
(14%) and Trewia nudiflora (14%). Maximum GBH was observed in Shorea robusta
(245 cm). The ground cover was dominated by shrubs (35%), grasses (35%) and
barren ground (30%).
Vegetation sampling in Rethi Reserve Forest reveals that the tree density is as high
as 362.8 trees per ha. The predominant tree species were Tectona grandis (37.9%),
Trewia nudiflora (27.6%), Cassia siamea (24.1%) and Amoora rohituka (10.4%).
Maximum GBH and height was recorded in Trewia nudiflora: 400 cm and 35 m
Map of the Titi – Rethi via Dumchi Corridor

respectively. The ground cover was dominated by shrubs (40%), barren ground
(30%), herbs (20%) and grasses (10%).
Of the total sampled area in Titi Reserve Forest, a total of 12 trees species were
recorded. The predominant species were Shorea robusta (27.3%), Castanopsis sp
(18.2%), Tetrameles nudiflora (12.1%), Amoora wallichii (9.1%). There is a salt lick near
the Holapara village area which possibly meets the mineral needs of elephants.
Estimated elephant population in the landscape

Forest/Land use
Forest Type: East Himalayan moist mixed deciduous, tropical moist deciduous,
northern dry deciduous, eastern sub-mountain semi evergreen
Settlements: Dalmore Garo Basti, labour lines of Dalmore, Gopalpur, Ramjhora,
Singhania, Hantupara and Dumchipara Tea Gardens, Beldanga village
Agriculture: Maize, wheat, paddy, beetlenut
Tea Estates: Gopalpur, Singhania, Dalmore, Ramjhora, Makrapara, Tulsipara,
Hoasinbad, Hantupara, Mujnai and Dumchipara
374 375
Rivers: Duti-Sukti Nadi, Pugli River, Garganda River, Birbitti Nadi, Rethi River, Titi A large number of public transport and daily supply vehicles ply on the Lankapara
Nadi, Bandri Nadi road. Vehicular traffic on the merging point of these roads was 34.3 vehicles per
Roadways: Lankapara road, Makrapara road, Madarihat-Lankapara road, Hat- hour from 6 am to 6 pm and 16.8 vehicles per hour from 6 pm to 6 am. The peak
Totopara road, Garganda road frequency from 4 pm to 5pm and 5 am to 6 am was 45-50 vehicles per hour.
Buildings: Dalmore Forest Beat Office; tea garden factories of Dalmore, Gopalpur,
Ramjhora, Hantupara, Mujnai and Dumchipara; Jamtola Bazaar, Indian Oil Corridor villages: Tea garden labour line colonies of Gumpha, Hantupara, Samsing,
filtration unit Dalmore Garo Basti and Beldanga.
Other ecological importance Corridor dependent villages: Labour colonies of Gopalpur, Ramjhora, Singhania,
Mountain Range: Eastern Himalayas Mujnai and Dumchipara Tea Gardens.
Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve Settlement Status of land Population
Protected Area: Jaldapara National Park & Gorumara National Park Dumchi Forest Village 350-400
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas Dalmore Tea Garden Labour Line 8500-9000
Dalmore Garo Basti Revenue Village 6000-6500
Beech Bhaga Hantupara Tea Garden 330-380
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Bara Line Hantupara Tea Garden 900-1000
Samsing Line Hantupara Tea Garden 400-500
Threats Gumpha Line Hantupara Tea Garden 250-300
1. People’s dependency on the corridor forest for fuelwood, illegal timber and cattle Beldanga Village Revenue Village 125-150
fodder is high. Hantupara Topline Hantupara Tea Garden 200-220
2. Indian Oil filtration unit and its settlements are bounded by high walls that have Most of the inhabitants here are daily wage labourers in the tea gardens. Tea
blocked part of the corridor. garden labour lines comprise people of multi-ethnic origins with a high percentage
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST). At least 85% of
3. Settlements are closer to the major townships of Birpara (North Bengal) and Pugli villagers belong to the ST category and are greatly dependent on forest land for
(Bhutan). Expansion of Dalmore Garo Basti and Ramjhora village settlements has agriculture, firewood and NTFP.
further narrowed down the corridor towards Rethi Reserve Forest.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Dumchi Forest Village (Rava Basti) on the fringes of
4. Trenches used for drainage inside the tea gardens hinder the free movement Dumchi Reserve Forest poses a threat to the forest and suffers a lot of damage
of elephants. due to elephants.
Based on figures from the forest department, damage was found to be high
5. Vehicular traffic: Daytime traffic is high on the Makrapara road due to vehicles in Madarihat Range (WL III Division) and Dalmore Range (Jalpaiguri Division). In
carrying finished products from the dolomite mine and cement factory in Bhutan.
376 377
Wildlife III Division (Cooch Behar) alone, an average of seven persons are killed
every year (2003-2013) due to conflict. More than rupees nine lakh is spent
annually on compensation for crop, house and livestock damage by elephants.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Habitat restoration needs to be undertaken inside Dumchi Reserve Forest on

a priority basis.
3. People from the southern part of the Hantupara Tea Garden labour line (Bara
Fig. 6.08: Dumchi Reserve Forest

Line) could be voluntarily relocated to increase the corridor width by about
500 m.
4. No new construction obstructing elephant movement should be permitted

inside the corridor areas, especially between Bara Line (Hantupara Tea Garden)
and Beldanga village, and from the Makrapara Tea Garden area to Dalmore Garo
Basti and Sighania Tea Garden factory. The villages should be suitably fenced off
to minimise conflict and prevent their expansion in the corridor area.
5. Trenches inside the tea gardens should be filled in.
378 379
6.09
Moraghat – Central Diana
The Moraghat - Central Diana corridor connects Moraghat Reserve Forest with
Diana Reserve Forest of Jalpaiguri Forest Division, leading on to Gorumara National
Park. From Moraghat Reserve Forest, elephants move from either side (mostly the
3D map showing the landscape of the Moraghat – Central Diana Corridor

north) of Totapara Forest Village and pass through Totapara and Gandrapara Tea
Gardens, Jalapara village, Prayagpur, Hridaypur and Upar Kolabari to reach Diana
Reserve Forest after crossing the Diana River.
State West Bengal

Connectivity Moraghat Reserve Forest with Diana
Reserve Forest
Length and Width 7-8 km and 1.5 km
88° 58’ 5”- 89° 0’ 35” E

Major land use Forest, settlements, tea gardens
Major habitation/settlements Tea garden labour quarters of
Gandrapara and Prayagpur
Forest type Tropical moist deciduous forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; used by small herds and bulls
mostly between October and January
Corridor habitat status: The sampled area in Moraghat Reserve Forest revealed
that the predominant tree species were Shorea robusta (36.4%), Tectona grandis
(18.2%), Lagerstroemia speciosa (18.2%), Amoora wallichii (18.2%) and Artocarpus
chaplasha (9.1%). Maximum GBH and height was recorded in Artocarpus chaplasha
380 381
and Shorea robusta respectively. Ground cover was dominated by shrubs (35%),
herbs (15%), grasses (10%) and barren ground (40%). Elephant food species like
Cassia siamea, Artocarpus chaplasha and Lagerstroemia speciosa were also recorded
in the corridor area.

(Source: West Bengal Elephant Census, 2015)
Forest/Land use
Map of the Moraghat – Central Diana Corridor

Settlements: Labour quarters of Gandrapara and Totapara Tea Gardens; Jalapara
village, Upar Kolabari village, part of Hridaypur village and Prayagpur village
Agriculture: Maize, wheat, paddy, potato, jute
Tea Estates: Gandrapara, Totapara
Rivers: Diana River
Roadways: Khairkata-Prayagpur road, Banarhat-Hridaypur road
Buildings: Totapara market, factories of Gandrapara and Totopara Tea Gardens

Protected Area: Reserve Forest
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Totapara Forest Village, Upar Kalabari, Prayagpur and Hridaypur,

and the labour lines of Totapara and Gandrapara Tea Gardens exert biotic
pressure on the corridor habitat.
382 383
2. The low socio-economic status of inhabitants increases their dependency on the CONSERVATION PLAN
neighbouring forest for timber, fruits, fuelwood, cattle fodder etc
3. A large extent of the corridor is occupied by revenue land and crop fields. department under an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent
4. Apart from tea gardens and settlements, the remainder of the corridor is under
cultivation. 2. No new construction should be permitted inside corridor areas especially
between Totapara and Gandrapara Tea Gardens.
Corridor villages: Prayagpur, Gandrapara Tea Garden labour quarters
3. Farming of crops not palatable to elephants should be encouraged in corridor
Corridor dependent villages: Totapara Tea Garden, Jalapara village, Upar Kolabari areas instead of paddy, maize, ragi or potato. The villagers have to be sensitised
village, part of Hridaypur village and provided with support in this regard.
Name Status of land Population 4. Habitat restoration from the north of Moraghat Reserve Forest (Totapara) to the
Totapara Tea Garden 2200-2500 east bank of Diana River would provide cover for the safe movement of elephants.
Gandrapara Tea Garden 2800-3000
Jalapara Revenue Land 1900-2200
Prayagpur Revenue Land 500-800
Hridaypur Revenue Land 800-1000
Upar Kolabari Revenue Land 600-900
Totapara Forest Village 150-180
The greater part of the corridor is revenue and agricultural land. The inhabitants
occupying the revenue land depend upon agriculture or small-scale businesses.
People here mostly belong to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe catergory.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Most of the conflict occurs in the fringes of Moraghat

Reserve Forest. Other than tea gardens, there are agricultural fields within
the corridor area. The villages of Upar Kolabari and Hridaypur face high levels
of conflict with elephants. As per data obtained from Jalpaiguri Forest Division,
Moraghat Range alone accounts for about 15.6% of the total compensation
disbursed by the division.
384 385
6.10
Titi – Rethi
This corridor links Titi Reserve Forest (the northern part of Jaldapara National Park,
Wildlife III Division) with Rethi Reserve Forest (Jalpaiguri Forest Division), leading
on to Gorumara National Park. Elephants pass through the Garganda, Lankapara
and Tulsipara Tea Gardens, Duti River, Pugli River and the Makrapara Tea Garden
3D map showing the landscape of Titi – Rethi corridor

area, and enter Rethi Feserve Forest through a narrow stretch of land between
Dalmore Garo Basti and Belgachia Line (Makrapara Tea Garden).
Alternate Name Garganda-Lankapara-Makrapara

Corridor
State West Bengal
Connectivity Titi Reserve Forest (Lankapara Range)
to Rethi Reserve Forest
Length and Width 8-9 km and 700-1300 m
89° 10’ 12”- 89° 15’ 49” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Forest Land leased to

Tea Gardens
Major land use Agriculture, tea gardens

Major habitation/settlements Labour colonies of Garganda and
Lankapara Tea Gardens
Forest type Northern dry deciduous seral sal,

eastern sub-mountain semi evergreen,
tropical moist deciduous forest
386 387
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in Ballalguri (a part of Titi Reserve

Forest) revealed that a minimum of eight tree species are found, of which three
are elephant food species: Albizzia lucida (Patkasiris), Castanopsis sp (Bhuise katus),
Strebulus asper (Sunthale). The highest GBH was measured in Tetrameles nudiflora
(Chothra/Morungo): 520 cm. A natural salt lick near Lankapara meets the mineral
needs of elephants in the area.
The Titi forest fringe mostly had barren ground (75%), followed by shrubs (20%),
herbs (4%) and grasses (1%). Ground cover on the fringes of Rethi Reserve Forest
was mostly defined by barren ground (60%), followed by shrubs (30%). The rest of
the ground was found to be covered by Pteridophytes (10%).
Map of Titi – Rethi corridor

Buxa Tiger Reserve (West): 118
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical moist deciduous, northern dry deciduous, eastern sub-
mountain semi evergreen
Settlements: Labour colonies of Garganda and Lankapara Tea Gardens
Agriculture: Paddy, beetlenut
Tea Estates: Garganda, Lankapara, Tulsipara, Makrapara, Hantupara and
Dumchipara Tea Gardens
Rivers: Titi, Bandri, Duti–Sukti, Pugli
Roadways: Madarihat-Lankapara Hat road, Lankapara road, Makrapara road
Buildings: Garganda Tea Garden Factory, Lankapara Tea Garden Factory,
Makrapara Tea Garden Factory, Lankapara Hat (market)

388 389
Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve Name Status of land Population
Protected Area: Buxa Tiger Reserve and Jaldapara National Park Garganda Tea Garden 4700 - 5000
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas Lankapara Tea Garden 12400 - 13000
Makrapara Tea Garden 3300 - 3700
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Dalmore Garo Basti Revenue Land 6000-6500

Threats
The entire area of the corridor passes through various tea gardens. At least 30%
1. Biotic pressure on the corridor forest is moderate. Local communities mostly
of the inhabitants belongs to the SC/ST category and work as labourers in the
belong to the tea gardens and depend on the forest for fuelwood, timber and
tea gardens. Settlements experience high human-elephant conflict in terms of
cattle fodder.
damage to property and lives.
2. Labour colonies of Garganda and Lankapara Tea Gardens are located in the
Human-Elephant Conflict: In Wildlife III Division (formerly Cooch Behar Forest
corridor.
Division) and Jalpaiguri Forest Division, human-elephant conflict mostly occurs in
Madarihat Range (WL III) and Dalmore Range.
3. The expansion of the corridor and dependent villages severely hinders animal
movement and has resulted in high conflict.
On an average, Wildlife III Forest Division and Jalpaiguri Forest Division annually
pay over Rs 9 lakh and Rs 13.5 lakh respectively to compensate for property
4. Trenches inside tea gardens, used for water drainage, hinder elephant movement.
damage (crops, houses and livestock) by elephants.
5. Sand and boulder mining on the Titi River affect the corridor.
CONSERVATION PLAN
6. Vehicular traffic: Daytime traffic is high on the Makrapara road due to vehicles
carrying material from the dolomite mine and cement factory in Bhutan. A large
number of public transport and daily supply vehicles ply on the Lankapara
road. Vehicular traffic on the merging point of these roads was 34.3 vehicles
per hour from 6 am to 6 pm and 16.8 vehicles per hour from 6 pm to 6 am.
The peak frequency from 4 pm to 5pm and 5 am to 6 am was almost 45-50
2. Labour lines of Garganda Tea Garden (Babu Line, Factory Line) need to be
vehicles per hour.
secured in consultation with the tea garden owners. If a consensus for relocation
cannot be reached, these areas could be fenced off to prevent the entry of
elephants.
Corridor villages: Tea garden labour colonies of Garganda and Lankapara.
3. Sand and boulder mining on the Titi River should be prohibited inside corridor
Corridor dependent villages: Makrapara Tea Garden and Dalmore Garo Basti.
areas.
390 391
4. Several steep trenches running through tea gardens inside the corridor area
need to be levelled.
5. No new construction should be permitted inside the corridor area especially

between Lankapara and Hantupara Tea Garden settlements and inside the
Garganda Tea Garden area. The area could also be notified as an eco-sensitive
zone to prevent change in land use.
Fig. 6.10: Rakti River at Lankapara with Jaldapara National Park in the background
Fig. 6.09: Lankapara Hat village in the Titi-Rethi Corridor
392 393
6.11
Buxa-Titi (via Torsa)
This corridor connects Buxa Tiger Reserve and Titi Reserve Forest, leading further
on to Jaldapara National Park. Elephants move along the Gobarjyoti stream and
3D map showing the landscape of the Buxa - Titi (via Torsa) Corridor
fringes of Deorali Line, Torsa Tea Garden, Mahua Tea Garden and Ron Bahadur
Basti. State Highway 12A intersects the corridor near Mahua Tea Garden. The
Deorali Line settlement, clusters of micro-scale sand and stone mining along the
Gobarjyoti stream, and high traffic on State Highway 12A are major threats to
elephant movement in the area.
Alternate Name Rangamati

State West Bengal
Connectivity Buxa Tiger Reserve (Hamiltonganj
Range) and Titi Reserve Forest
(Lankapara Range)
Length and Width 12-14 km and 0 - 400 m
89° 18’ 43”- 89° 24’ 45” E

Major land use Agriculture, tea gardens, settlements,
sand and stone mining
Major habitation/settlements Ron Bahadur Basti, Deorali Line (Polot
village)
Forest type Tropical and eastern sub-mountain
semi evergreen forest; northern dry
deciduous sal forest; riparian forest;
plantation forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal and occasional
394 395
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in Buxa Tiger Reserve revealed that
about 70-80% of area is open forest. The predominant species found in the recent
plantation were Albizzia lucida (44%) and Tectona grandis (50%). The maximum
GBH recorded was only 35 cm. Ground cover was dominated by shrubs (50%),
followed by grasses (40%) and barren ground (10%).
In the area sampled in Titi Reserve Forest, the predominant tree species were
Castanopsis sp ( 30%), Litsea salicifolia (10%), Amoora wallichii (10%), Tetrameles
nudiflora (10%) and Crataeva unilocularis (10%). The maximum GBH observed was
in Tetrameles nudiflora (520 cm). Ground cover was dominated by barren ground
(75%), followed by shrubs (20%) and herbs (5%).
Map of the Buxa - Titi (via Torsa) Corridor

Buxa Tiger Reserve: 215
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical semi evergreen forest, northern dry deciduous sal forest,
eastern sub-mountain semi evergreen forest, riparian forest, plantation forest
Settlements: Ron Bahadur Basti, Guelaghari village, Polot/ Deorali Line, Ballalguri
village
Agriculture: Maize, ragi, paddy, beetlenut
Tea Estates: Mahua, Torsa, Dalsingpara Tea Gardens
Rivers: Basra River, Gobarjyoti stream, Torsa River
Roadways: Hasimara-Phuentsholing road (SH 12A)
Buildings: Mahua Tea Garden factory, multiple stone crushing and sand mining
units

Elephant Range: Eastern Duars (Terai) Region
396 397
Protected Area: Tiger Reserve, National Park and Reserve Forest Village Households Population
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas Deorali Line 200-220 1000-1200
IBA: Buxa Tiger Reserve (IN-WB-01), Eastern Himalayas (EBA 130) Ron Bahadur Basti 280-300 1200-1600
Guelaghari 380-400 1500-2000
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Ballalguri 350-400 1500-2000
Threats
1. The expanding settlements of Ron Bahadur Basti and Deorali Line on either side Human-Elephant Conflict: The incidence of human-elephant conflict is reasonably
of SH 12A have constricted the width of the corridor to about 400 m, which has high in the corridor area. In the Hamiltonganj Range of Buxa Tiger Reserve, eight
resulted in increased human-elephant conflict. elephant deaths and seven human deaths were reported between 2003 and
2013. In Wildlife III Divison (Titi Reserve Forest), around 23 elephant deaths and
2. Sand and stone mining; Multiple clusters of temporary stone crushing units 49 human deaths were reported during this period.
as well as sand mining activity along the Gobarjyoti stream hinder elephant
CONSERVATION PLAN
movement.
3. Vehicular traffic: There is a high volume of traffic on SH 12A (Hasimara-
Phuentsholing), which is the major road connection between Bengal and Bhutan,
connecting Alipurduar, NH 31C with Phuentsholing and Thimpu. About 300
vehicles per hour ply on the road from 6 am to 6 pm, and 59 vehicles per hour ply
2. Construction hindering elephant movement should not be allowed in the
from 6 pm to 6 am.
corridor area.
4. A proposed Asian Highway and railway line between Hasimara and Bhutan are
3. Vehicular speed should be controlled by suitable barriers on the Hasimara-
potential threats to the unhindered movement of elephants.
Phuentsholing road which passes through the corridor.
Corridor villages: Ron Bahadur Basti, Deorali Line (Polot Village). The primary
4. Adequate mitigation measures for the proposed Asian Highway and railway line
occupation of local communities here is as labourers in the tea gardens, though
between Hasimara and Bhutan must be taken to safeguard elephant movement.
they do practice agriculture as well. Farmers of Deorali Line have, however,
stopped agricultural activities due to severe crop depredation by elephants.
5. The elephant habitats of the Buxa forest fringes, especially between Deorali
Beetlenut plantations are abundant throughout Ron Bahadur Basti, providing a
and the southern part of Gopal Bahadur Basti should be restored to facilitate safe
secondary source of income to the villagers. A majority of the families living in
passage of elephants.
these villages belong to the SC or ST category.
6. Land use change inside Mahua, Toorsa, and Dalsingpara Tea Gardens should
Corridor dependent villages: Ballalguri and Guelagharia
be strictly prohibited.
398 399
7. Sand and stone mining along the Gobarjyoti stream within the corridor area
should be banned.
8. Encouraging eco-tourism and fostering plantations for fuelwood and fodder

supply would help to decrease the forest dependency of local communities.
9. In Deorali Line, villagers have stopped cultivating their lands with paddy, maize
or ragi as elephants damage the entire farmland each year. In dire frustration,
villagers are willing to relocate to a safer place, away from elephants. Part of
Fig. 6.12: Torsa River plain with Titi Reserve Forest in the background
the village (upstream of Gobarjyoti stream from the SH 12A bridge) should be
relocated.
Fig. 6.11: Stone mining operation on Gobarjyoti River in Buxa-Titi (Torsa)
400 401
6.12
Buxa - Titi
(via Beech & Bharnobari TE)
This is an important corridor which connects Buxa Tiger Reserve and Titi Reserve
Forest (Wildlife III Division), thereby connecting the elephant population between
Buxa Tiger Reserve and Jaldapara National Park. From Buxa, elephants pass
3D map showing the landscape of the Buxa – Titi Corridor

through Gopal Bahadur Basti till Bharnobari Tea Garden, then move between
Beech and Dalsingpara Tea Gardens to enter Titi Reserve Forest near Ballalguri.
High vehicular traffic on State Highway 12A, which passes through the corridor,
and trenches running along this highway hinder animal movement. This is one of
the most favoured corridors between Buxa Tiger Reserve and Titi Reserve Forest.
Alternate name Beech-Bharnobari Tea Estate Corridor

State West Bengal
Connectivity Buxa Tiger Reserve (Hamiltonganj
Range) and Titi Reserve Forest
(Lankapara Range)
Length and Width 5-6 km and 0-1.5km
89° 18’ 24”- 89° 23’ 26” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Revenue Land

Major land use Reserve Forest, patta lands, forest
land leased to tea gardens
Major habitation/settlements Agriculture, tea gardens and
settlements. Gopal Bahadur Basti and
Beech Garden Topline
Forest type Tropical and eastern sub-mountain
semi evergreen forest; northern dry
deciduous sal forests; riparian and
plantation forests
402 403
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in the Buxa forest fringes showed
that about 50% of the area was open forest while some trees were found only
in a plantation area which is approximately 15 years old. Tree plantation was
dominated by Amoora wallichii (42%) and Cassia siamea (28%), with a maximum
GBH of 100 cm and 110 cm and an average maximum height of 26 m and
24 m respectively. The ground cover was dominated by shrubs (50%), followed by
grasses (40%) and barren ground (10%).
In the Titi forest fringes, the predominant tree species were Castanopsis sp (30%),
Litsea salicifolia (10%), Amoora wallichii (10%) and Tetrameles nudiflora (10%), with
scattered populations of Albizzia lucida and Strebulus asper. Maximum GBH was
recorded in Tetrameles nudiflora (520 cm). Average tree density was estimated as
Map of the Buxa – Titi Corridor

500 trees per ha. Ground cover was dominated by barren ground (75%), followed
by shrubs (20%) and herbs (5%). There is a salt lick near the Holapara village area
that could meet the mineral needs of elephants.

Buxa Tiger Reserve: 215
Jaldapara National Park: 65 -75
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical semi evergreen forest, riparian forest, plantation forest,
northern dry deciduous sal forest, eastern sub-mountain semi evergreen forest
Settlements: Gopal Bahadur Basti, Beech Tea Garden labour line, Bharnobari Tea
Garden labour Line, Ballalguri village
Agriculture: Maize, paddy, ragi, betelnut
Tea Estates: Beech Tea Garden, Bharnobari Tea Garden, Dalsingpara Tea Garden
Rivers: Basra, Torsa, Buri Torsa
Roadways: Hasimara-Phuentsholing Road (State Highway 12A)
Building/structures: Bharnobari and Beech Tea Garden factories, boundary wall of
the mobile tower (near Beech Tea Garden)
404 405

Settlement Status of land Households
Gopal Bahadur Basti Revenue 500-600
Beech Topline (Beech TG) Tea Garden 400-450
Forest Line (Beech TG) Tea Garden 200-225
Protected Area: Buxa Tiger Reserve and Jaldapara National Park Jathu Line (Beech TG) Tea Garden 200-225
Biodiversity Hotspot Region: Eastern Himalayas Holapara Forest Village Revenue & Forest 220-250
IBA: Buxa Tiger Reserve (IN-WB-01), Eastern Himalayas (EBA 130) Ballalguri Forest Village Revenue & Forest 200-220
Bhutri Basti Forest 120-150
13 No. MES Basti Revenue 3 houses within corridor
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Bharnobari Tea Garden 2000
Threats Dalsingpara Tea Garden 1600-1700
1. Large human settlements in the corridor: New houses are being constructed in
Gopal Bahadur Basti, 13 No. MES Basti, and Dalsingpara Tea Garden. Expansion People from tea garden labour lines undertake paddy/ragi cultivation in small
of these settlements towards the corridor poses further threat to elephant patches on the corridor. Inhabitants of Gopal Bahadur Basti earn their livelihood
movement. through business, agriculture and beetlenut plantations. About 89% of families
here belong to the SC/ST category.
2. Habitat on either side of the Basra River is largely degraded.
Human-Elephant Conflict: The incidence of human-elephant conflict is reasonably
3. Trench (old railway line) along State Highway 12A hinders animal movement. high in the corridor area. In the Hamiltonganj Range of Buxa Tiger Reserve, eight
elephant deaths and seven human deaths were reported between 2003 and
4. High vehicular traffic on the Hasimara-Phuentsholing road that serves as the 2013. In Wildlife III Divison (Titi Reserve Forest), around 23 elephant deaths and
major connection between West Bengal and Bhutan. About 300 vehicles per hour 49 human deaths were reported during this period.
ply on the road between 6 am and 6 pm, and 59 vehicles per hour ply between 6
pm and 6 am. Peak vehicular intensity is 275 vehicles per hour, between 11 am At least 38.5% and 34.8% of elephant deaths in the Buxa Tiger Reserve (West)
and 1 pm. Division and Wildlife III Division respectively occur due to human interventions
(train-hits, electrocutions and poisonings).
5. The proposed Asian Highway and railway line between Hasimara and Bhutan are
potential threats to the free movement of elephants.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Corridor villages: Gopal Bahadur Basti and Beech Garden Topline.
Corridor dependent villages: Dalsingpara Tea Garden labour Line, Bharnobari Tea
Garden labour Line, Beech Tea Garden labour Line, and 13 No. MES Basti.
406 407
2. Vehicular speeds should be controlled by suitable barriers on SH 12A, which

passes through the corridor area.
3. Expansion of Gopal Bahadur Basti, Bharnobari Tea Garden, Dalsingpara Tea

Garden, Beech Tea Garden and 13 No. MES Basti towards the corridor area
should be controlled.
4. The southern section of Gopal Bahadur Basti (about 500 m) needs to be

secured in consultation with the villagers.
5. Trenches meant for waste water drainage in tea gardens need to be levelled,
especially the one running along the Hasimara-Phuentsholing road (SH 12A) in
the corridor area.
Fig. 6.13: Gopal Bahadur Basti

408 409
6.13
Nimati – Chilapata
This corridor facilitates elephant movement between the Nimati Range of

Buxa Tiger Reserve and Chilapata Reserve Forest of Wildlife III Division, thereby
maintaining elephant movement between Buxa Tiger Reserve and Jaldapara
3D map showing the landscape of the Nimati - Chilapata Corridor

Wildlife Sanctuary. Elephants from Buxa cross National Highway 31C (between
the southern limit of Nimti Domohoni village and the Poro River), Nimtijhora Tea
Garden, the Nimati-Paitkapara road, Basra River and Dakshin Mendabari village to
enter Chilapata Reserve Forest.
Alternate name Buxa-Chilapata Corridor

State West Bengal
Connectivity Buxa Tiger Reserve (Nimati Range)
with Chilapata Reserve Forest, finally
leading to Jaldapara National Park
Length and Width 3-4.5 km and 0-3 km (of which about 2
km is occupied by the Nimtijhora Tea
Garden Labour Line)
89° 24’ 15”- 89° 26’ 43” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Revenue Land

Major land use Forest land leased to tea gardens
Major habitation/settlements Agriculture, tea gardens, settlements,
Dakshin Mendabari, Nimtijhora Tea
Garden Labour Line
Forest type Sub-Himalayan secondary wet mixed
forest, eastern Bhabar and Terai sal
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional and seasonal (September
to February); mostly loners and small
herds
410 411
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in the Nimati Range of Buxa Tiger
Reserve revealed that the predominant species was Lagerstroemia speciosa (39%),
followed by Bischofia javanica (17%) and Terminalia crenulata (11%). Maximum
GBH was observed in Trewia nudiflora (150 cm) and Lagerstroemia speciosa (148
cm). Tree density was estimated at 225 trees per hectare. An artificial salt lick is
available inside this range for animals using the corridor.
Vegetation sampling in Chilapata Reserve Forest showed that the predominant

tree species were Tectona grandis (25%), Anthocephalus chinensis (21%),
Lagerstroemia speciosa (17%) and Amoora wallichii (17%). Maximum GBH was
observed in Michelia champaka (210 cm) followed by Lagerstroemia speciosa (160
Map of the Nimati - Chilapata Corridor

cm) and Amoora wallichii (135 cm). The ground cover on the fringes of Nimati
and Chilapata was dominated by shrubs (45%), followed by barren ground (35%),
herbs (17%) and grasses (3%).
Estimated elephants number in the landscape

Buxa Tiger Reserve Elephant Population: 215
Jaldapara National Park Elephant Population: 65-75
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Sub-Himalayan secondary wet mixed forest, eastern Bhabar
and Terai sal
Settlements: Dakshin Mendabari, Uttar Paitkapara, Nimati-Domohoni, labour lines
of Nimtijhora Tea Garden
Agriculture: Maize, jute, paddy, ragi
Tea Estates: Nimtijhora Tea Garden, Paitkapara Tea Garden
Rivers: Basra River, Bhandari River
Roadways: National Highway 31C, Paitkapara-Nimti road
Buildings: Nimtijhora Tea Garden Factory, new lodging facility at Istikutum Khamar
Bari, Hathkhola Market (12-14 shops), Mendabari Forest Beat Office.
412 413
Other ecological importance Village Name Status of land Population

Mountain Range: Eastern Himalayas Dakshin Mendabari Revenue 1800-2200
Elephant Range: Eastern Duars (Terai) Region (Southern Part)
Elephant Reserve: Eastern Duars Elephant Reserve Bongbasti Forest 300-400
Protected Area: Buxa Tiger Reserve, Jaldapara National Park Uttar Paitkapara Revenue 170-200
Biodiversity Hotspot: Eastern Himalayas (Northern part)
IBA: Buxa Tiger Reserve (IN-WB-01), Jaldapara National Park (IN-WB-04) & Eastern Bania Basti Forest 180-200
Himalayas (EBA 130) Nimtijhora Tea Garden 4400-4800

Most people in these villages work as labourers in the neighboring tea garden, while
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
some are farmers. Paddy, maize, jute and ragi are the crops of choice. Dakshin
Mendabari and Uttar Paitkapara are mostly dependent on jute plantations.
Threats
Elephants often trample paddy, ragi, maize in an attempt to raid the fields.
1. Settlements: The Nimtijhora Labour Line settlement along with the expanding
Uttar Paitkapara and Nimti-Domohoni settlements hinder elephant movement
Human-Elephant Conflict: The incidence of human-elephant conflict is reasonably
high in the corridor area. In the Nimati Range of Buxa Tiger Reserve (W), 15 elephant
deaths and 15 human deaths were reported between 2003 and 2013. Some 23
2. The expansion of Dakshin Mendabari village to the west of the Basra River, and the
elephant deaths and 49 human deaths were reported in Wildlife III (Cooch Behar)
consequent increase in agricultural activities, has increased conflict and hindered
Division during the same period.
elephant movement.
At least 38.5% and 34.8% of elephant deaths in the Buxa Tiger Reserve (W) Division
3. A new resort (a lodge at Ishtikutum Khamar Bari) just inside the corridor is a
and Wildlife III Division respectively occur due to human interventions (train-hits,
potential threat.
electrocutions and poisonings).
4. Vehicle traffic: Two roads pass through the corridor: NH 31C (the Nimati-
Samuktala stretch) and the Nimati-Paitkapara road. A peak vehicular intensity of
CONSERVATION PLAN
229 vehicles per hour was observed from 1 pm to 2 pm on the highway, with
a daily average of 99.54 vehicles per hour. On average 39.5 vehicles per hour,
mostly goods vehicles, move on the highway between 6 pm and 6 am. Night traffic
decreases after 10 pm.
activities detrimental to animal movement. An identified area in the corridor has
been proposed for inclusion as an eco-sensitive zone by the forest department.
Corridor villages: Dakshin Mendabari, Nimtijhora Tea Garden Labour Line.
2. A 500-metre section of the southern part of the Nimtijhora Tea Garden Labour
Corridor dependent villages: Uttar Paitkapara (southern part), Bongbasti.
Line towards Uttar Paitkapara needs to be secured to increase the effective width
414 415
of the corridor. The northern part of Uttar Paitkapara and the southern part of
Dakshin Mendabari could also be considered for relocation on a priority basis.
3. Afforestation should be carried out especially inside Nimati Reserve Forest and
the adjoining Nimtijhora Tea Garden.
4. Vehicular speeds should be controlled using suitable barriers on National

Highway 31C passing through the corridor.
5. The new lodge at Ishtikutum Khamar Bari could be relocated outside the
corridor.
Fig. 6.15: Dakshin Mendabari Village

Fig. 6.14: Nimtijhora Labour Line Quarters
416 417
6.14
Buxa-Ripu at Sankosh
This corridor connects Buxa Tiger Reserve (West Bengal) with the Ripu forest in
Kochugaon Forest Division (Assam). The corridor passes through the Sankosh and
Kalikhola Rivers, tea gardens (Sankosh, Kumargram and Newlands), and human
3D map showing the landscape of the Buxa-Ripu at Sankosh Corridor

settlements (Sankosh Forest Village, Kulkule Forest Village, Newlands Forest
Village). Small elephant herds oocasionally move through the Nouthale forest
and the neighbouring Lhamoyzingkha settlement areas of Bhutan. Power fencing
around the Kulkule Forest Village significantly blocks the corridor.
Alternate name Sankosh Corridor

State West Bengal and Assam
Connectivity Kumargram Forest (Buxa Tiger
Reserve-East) with Ripu forest (Assam)
89° 46’ 10”- 89° 53’ 26” E

Major land use Forest, agriculture, tea gardens,
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Kulkule Forest Village, Sankosh Forest
Village, Newlands Forest Village
Forest type Northern dry deciduous sal forest,
Sub-Himalayan secondary wet mixed
forest, East Himalayan moist mixed
deciduous forest
418 419
Corridor habitat status: Vegetation sampling in the corridor forest revealed that
the predominant tree species were Lagerstroemia speciosa (30.8%), Shorea robusta
(27%), Terminalia crenulata (21.6%) and Michelia champaka (8.1%). Maximum GBH
was recorded in Terminalia crenulata (240cm). Ground cover was dominated by
barren ground (62%), followed by shrubs (30%) and herbs (8%).

Buxa Tiger Reserve: 215 (2011 census)
Kachugaon Forest Division (Assam): 193 (2011 census)
Map of the Buxa-Ripu at Sankosh Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Northern dry deciduous sal forest, sub-Himalayan secondary wet
mixed forest, east Himalayan moist mixed deciduous forest
Settlements: Kumargram Forest Village, Sankosh Forest Village, Newlands Forest
Village, Kulkule
Agriculture: Maize, wheat, paddy, bamboo
Tea Estates: Kumargram Tea Garden, Newlands Tea Garden, Sankosh Tea Garden
Rivers: Ryadak, Kalikhola, Sankosh
Roadways: Barobisa-Sankosh-Bhutan road
Artefacts: Kumargram Tea Garden factory, Sankosh Tea Garden factory, Newlands
Tea Garden factory, electric fencing around Kulkule Forest Village, Kalijhora SSB
Camp, Newlands SSB Camp, Kulkule Basti

Protected Area: Buxa Tiger Reserve
IBA: Buxa Tiger Reserve (WB-01), Eastern Himalayas (EBA 130)
420 421
HUMAN DIMENSIONS About 5200 people inhabit these places. Most earn a living as tea garden
labourers, or through farming.
Threats
1. Settlements: Electric fencing around the Kulkule (Kumargram Forest Village) Human-Elephant Conflict: About four elephant deaths and seven human deaths
and Kalikhola Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) camps inhibits elephant movement. per year were reported from Buxa Tiger Reserve (East) Division between 2003
The labour lines of the Sankosh, Kumargram and Newlands Tea Gardens further and 2013. Seventeen percent of elephant deaths and 8.3% of property damage
restrict elephant movement. Encroachment in the Ripu Reserve Forest area is occurred within the Kumargram Range alone. Cases of human death/injury due
another hindrance. to elephants were negligible in this range.
2. Habitat degradation in Ripu Reserve Forest and Kachugaon Forest Division

(Assam) due to illegal felling of trees and encroachment. CONSERVATION PLAN
3. Cattle grazing in the corridor forests and fringe areas has degraded the habitat 1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and legally
quality. protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and developmental
activities inimical to animal movement.
4. Traffic: Although 51.2 vehicles per hour move on the Barobisa-Sankosh-
Lhamoyzingkha road between 6 am and 6 pm on average, the vehicular 2. In consultation with villagers, Kulkule Forest Village could be relocated with the
movement is only about 5.6 vehicles per hour between 6 pm and 6 am. Hence, provision of suitable relocation packages. A few shops located along the side of
this is currently not a major threat. Sankosh River need to be shifted outside the corridor.
Corridor villages: Kulkule Forest Village, Sankosh Forest Village, Newlands Forest 3. Better protection of habitat as well as habitat restoration should be taken up
Village. on a priority basis in Ripu Reserve Forest.
Corridor dependent villages: Sankosh Tea Garden, Newlands Tea Garden and 4. Expansion of the tea garden labour lines of Sankosh, Newlands and Kumargram
Kumargram Tea Garden labour lines. towards the corridor area should be prevented.
Village Name Status of land Population Cows, goats

and sheep
Sankosh Tea Garden Labour Line 850-950 873
Newlands Tea Garden Labour Line 1800-1900 1886
Kumargram Tea Garden Labour Line 750-800 777
Kulkule Forest Village 425-450 392
Newlands Forest Village 200-230 167
Sankosh Forest Village 750-800 623
422 423
07 THE ELEPHANTS OF NORTH-EASTERN INDIA had an

almost contiguous distribution with the populations of
Bhutan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar in the past.
Elephant corridors of However, due to degradation and fragmentation of the
NORTH-EASTERN INDIA habitat, these elephants are now confined to certain
Sandeep Kr Tiwari, Sunil Kyarong, Anwaruddin discrete areas. They are now distributed in four distinct
populations and a few scattered populations in the Barak
Choudhury, A Christy Williams, K Ramkumar
Valley (Choudhury, 1999). The major elephant populations
and Dilip Deori are as follows:
(A) North Bank of the Brahmaputra: This population

extends from northern West Bengal (this has been dealt
with separately in this publication) through the Himalayan
foothills and Duars covering southern Bhutan, northern
Assam and Arunachal Pradesh along the north bank of
the Brahmaputra River. In eastern Assam, the range also
covers part of the flood plains of the Brahmaputra and
the Lohit River. In 1970, due to the clearing of a strip of
about 20 km in the Dibang Valley of Arunachal Pradesh for
cultivation and habitation, the elephant population of the
north and south bank (eastern areas) became separated
from each other (Choudhury, 1995).
The elephant habitats of the north bank are under

severe biotic pressure, resulting in degradation and
fragmentation. Due to large-scale encroachment and
tree felling in Kochugaon Forest Division and other areas
of Kokrajhar district, elephant movement between Buxa
Tiger Reserve (northern West Bengal) and Manas National
Park (Assam) has been severely affected. Between 1977
<< Elephants crossing

the Kalapahar-Daigrung
Corridor in Karbi Anglong,
Assam
18 425
and 2007, Kokrajhar lost 692.76 sq km of forest cover of which 228.16 sq km was and shrinkage of habitat in Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary, Charduar Reserve
lost between 1997 and 2007 (Nath and Mwchahary, 2012). Between 1991 and Forest and Balipara Reserve Forest, the movement of elephants has been severely
1998, more than 1500 sq km of forest area came under encroachment in the affected and the human-elephant conflict is on the rise.
north bank (Talukdar and Barman, 2003).
Movement of elephants has also been affected between Pakke Tiger Reserve and
The Sonitpur district of Assam has been the worst affected: between 1994 and Papum Reserve Forest in Arunachal Pradesh due to human encroachment and
1999 it lost 86.75 sq km (1.7%) of forest area, and between 1999 and 2001 it agricultural activities. Elephants mainly use riverbeds to move between these two
lost 145.44 sq km (2.86%) of forest area (Srivastava et al., 2002). Thus, 229.64 areas. Seijosa nullah and a small plantation area near Longka nullah serve as a
sq km of moist deciduous forest and 2.55 sq km of semi evergreen forest have movement path between the two habitats due to the complete clearing of forest in
been lost between 1994 and 2001. As of 2016, the Gohpur Reserve Forest (133 Nauduar Reserve Forest in Assam. Elephant movement between Drupong Reserve
sq km) in Sonitpur is totally encroached with no sign of the forest remaining. Forest and Doimukh Reserve Forest of Banderdewa Forest Division has also been
Similarly, other Reserve Forests such as Balipara (100 sq km out of 188 sq km severely affected by encroachment along National Highway 52A and construction
under encroachment), Charduar (130 sq km under encroachment), Nauduar (130 of railway lines and other developmental
sq km under encroachment), Biswanath (76 sq km under encroachment), Behali activities. The hydro-electric project in The elephant habitats
and Singri in this district are under heavy encroachment. Although Sonitpur Lower Subansiri has also affected the of the North Bank of
district has about 1200 sq km of forest cover in official records, what is left on elephant movement in the area. The
the Brahmaputra have
the ground and under the forest department’s control accounts for less than elephant movement between Pakke Tiger
been placed under
400 sq km. Of these, 200 sq km is in Nameri National Park, 128 sq km in Sonai- Reserve and Doimara Reserve Forest has
Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary (satellite core of Nameri National Park) and about 60 sq been severely affected by encroachment
severe biotic pressure,
km in Behali Reserve Forest. The rest is either degraded or is being rapidly lost. of land, expansion of human settlements, resulting in degradation
Between 2013 and 2015, the district has lost 11 sq km of forest cover (FSI, 2015). industry and other structures that have and fragmentation.
This has resulted in severe human-elephant conflict leading to large-scale crop come up on either side of NH 229.
depredation and loss of human and elephant lives. The elephant movement through the Tippi corridor is almost impaired and the
Dezling corridor is also severely threatened due to slash and burn cultivation and
The conflict in Sonitpur district reached its peak between 1998 and 2002, encroachment.
culminating in the mass poisoning of elephants and the death of 22 elephants.
In just these four years, 62 elephants died in Sonitpur East and West Division, (B) South Bank of the Brahmaputra: As already mentioned in Chapter One, the
Rowta Reserve Forest and West Assam Wild Life Division (Nameri Tiger Reserve). elephant population on the southern bank of the Brahmaputra can be divided
Between 2005 and 2015, about 145 wild elephant deaths and 245 human deaths into three distinct populations – those of the eastern, central and western areas.
related to human-elephant conflict were reported in Sonitpur district, mainly in
the tea estate areas. Elephants from Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary and Charduar (1) Despite the fragmentation of the eastern range, elephants still move through
Reserve Forest have traditionally been visiting the degraded Singri Hills Reserve tea gardens and cultivated areas. This range became separated from the north
Forest through tea gardens and agricultural fields. However, due to degradation bank population during the 1970s and from the south bank-central areas in the
426 427
early 1980s. The separation from the south bank-central areas was due to large routes through Tirap and Changlang districts of Arunachal Pradesh and Mon and
scale felling and encroachment in Doyang Reserve Forest, Nambor (South Block) Tuensang districts of Nagaland are no longer available due to heavy poaching by
Reserve Forest, Diphu Reserve Forest and Rengma Reserve Forest, totaling about the Konyak and the Wancho Nagas and clearance for jhum (Choudhury, 1999).
990 sq km of forest area (Choudhury, 1999). The range is spread over lower Dibang Movement between Upper Dihing (East and West Block) and Doom Dooma takes
Valley and Lohit, Changlang and Tirap districts in Arunachal Pradesh; Tinsukia, place mainly through tea gardens and agricultural land. This has been severely
Dibrugarh, Sibsagar, Charaideo, Jorhat and Golaghat districts in Assam; and Mon, affected along the Golai-Powai corridor due to settlements, an Indian Oil Ltd
Tuensang, Mokokchung and Wokha districts in Nagaland. depot and other structures that have come up on both sides of the national
highway. Movement of elephants between Lakkipathar Range of Upper Dihing
This range has been fragmented at many places, the most notable being the area (West Block) Reserve Forest (Digboi Forest Division) and Tokowani Reserve Forest
along the Dhansiri River (Doyang Reserve Forest, Nambor South Reserve Forest, (Doom Dooma Forest Division) used to occur through Langkasi and Anandbari
Rengma Reserve Forest and Diphu Reserve Forest), thereby severely hindering the Tea Gardens. Due to encroachment and the expansion of settlements on both
movement of elephants between this part of Assam and Nagaland. Till the 1980s sides of the Tinsukia-Digboi highway (NH 37) in the last decade, elephants are
elephant movement was reported between Rengma Reserve Forest (Assam) and only using the corridor area for crop raiding and the connectivity is totally broken.
Baghty Valley (Nagaland), between the villages of Sungkha and Lishuya. Similarly,
elephant movement from Desoi Reserve Forest and Hollongapahar (Assam) to (2) The central range is one of the most important habitats for the elephant in
adjacent elephant habitat in Nagaland has been severely hindered by habitat north-eastern India and extends from Kaziranga National Park across the Karbi
degradation in Assam and Nagaland. plateau, parts of the central Brahmaputra plains and the basin of the Diyung River
to the foot of the Meghalaya plateau in Assam and Meghalaya. This population has
As a result of the large-scale destruction of forest cover in the Golaghat district become separated from the south bank-western population due to expansion of
in the last three decades, elephants move to National Highway 37 and nearby Guwahati city, clearing of forests, jhum cultivation and settlements along National
agricultural land in search of food. This area had dense forest cover till the mid Highway 40 (Shillong-Guwahati) in the Rhi-Bhoi district of Meghalaya. Elephants
1980s. Between 2013 and 2015, the district lost 5 sq km of forest cover (FSI, 2015). from the eastern Karbi plateau move down regularly to the plains of Kaziranga
Recently, Numaligarh Refinerary Limited (NRL) excavated around 12.5 acres (five National Park at the beginning of winter, ascending once again at the advent
hectares) of forested land near Deopahar proposed Reserve Forest to develop of the floods (Choudhury, 1999). Movement between these two forests takes
a golf course. A large area was fenced off, hindering elephant movement. The place mainly through tea gardens and cultivated lands. Heavy traffic on National
National Green Tribunal has since ordered that the fence be removed and the Highway 37, which passes through the corridor, is one of the major barriers for
area reforested. animal movement, especially during the rains. There is occasional movement
between this population and the south bank-western area population through
At present, about 40% of the northern part of Nambor Reserve Forest has been Nongkhyllem Reserve Forest and the degraded habitat of Rhi-Bhoi district (through
encroached (Talukdar and Burman, 2003). The movement of elephants from the Nongwah Mawphar village area established in 1999), but this has also been
Digboi and Doom Dooma Forest Divisions to forest areas of the Changlang severely affected in recent years.
district of Arunachal Pradesh has been severely hindered. A part of the elephant
population of the Changlang district is continuous with that of Myanmar through (3) The habitat in the western range supports a significant population of elephants
a corridor in Namdhapa National Park. However, all the other probable migration in parts of Assam and Meghalaya. It extends from near Guwahati through the
428 429
foothills of the Meghalaya plateau (Garo and Khasi Hills) including the districts that support a sizeable elephant population as mentioned in Chapter One. The
of Kamrup (Metropolitan) and Goalpara in Assam, and Rhi-Bhoi, West Khasi Hills, forest cover of north-eastern India is disappearing at a very alarming rate due to
East Garo Hills, West Garo Hills, Southwest Garo Hills and South Garo Hills in a host of factors that include the growing human population and the consequent
Meghalaya. Elephants also occasionally move to the forests of Bangladesh from increase in agriculture, settlements and encroachments; the construction of
the forest areas of Baghmara in Meghalaya. roads, railway lines and hydro-electric projects; and massive bamboo extraction,
mining and oil exploration in prime elephant habitats. More than 1000 sq km of
The majority of the habitat comprises tropical moist deciduous and tropical semi forest were being destroyed annually (Choudhury,1999). Between 2013 and 2015,
evergreen forests. Tropical wet evergreen forest occurs along the narrow river north-east India lost 628 sq km of forest cover of which about 270 sq km was in
valleys. The terrain is mainly hilly in this region and the movement of elephants the state of Assam (48 sq km), Arunachal Pradesh (73 sq km), Meghalaya (71 sq
was mostly unhindered until very recently. This area also includes the Garo Hill km) and Nagaland (78 sq km) (FSI 2015).
Elephant Reserve spread over 3500 sq km and supports approximately 1200
elephants. However, developmental activities and clearing of forest for jhumming The ultimate cause of habitat shrinkage is the rapid growth of the human population.
(slash and burn cultivation) has resulted in the degradation and fragmentation of Around 450,000 families in north-eastern India annually cultivate 10,000 sq km,
habitat. The problem has been compounded due to the fact that most of the forest with the total area affected by jhumming amounting to approximately 44,000 sq
area is under community or local control; only 410 sq km is under the control of km. Due to reduced fallow periods, the regeneration of young secondary forest
the forest department and the rest is private forest. Further, due to large deposits is halted by crop planting, changing the landscape extensively. Degraded forests,
of coal and limestone in the Garo Hills, many elephant areas are in danger. Coal bamboo thickets and weeds dominate these areas. As a high percentage of
and limestone mining in the Darengiri area has led to fragmentation of the habitat people live in rural areas (85%) with farming as the main occupation, the large-
and hindered the movement of elephants between Angratoli Reserve Forest and scale destruction of forests and wetlands seems inevitable.
Emangre Reserve Forest, increasing human-elephant conflict. Between 2007-08
and 2015, 48 human deaths due to elephants were reported. The fencing of the
international border between India and Bangladesh has further affected elephant
movement. Wildlife Trust of India, in collaboration with the Garo Hills Autonomous
District Council and the state forest department, and with the participation of
the local communities, has secured the elephant corridors between Balpakram
National Park, Siju Wildlife Sanctuary and Rewak Reserve Forest, and Imangre
Reserve Forest leading to Nokrek National Park, by getting areas notified as
Village Reserve Forests. Human settlements, the new North-Eastern Hill University
campus, the Garo Hills Student Union building, fishery ponds, the 2nd Police
Battalion camp, heavy traffic on the Guwahati-Tura road and agricultural activities
have almost barred elephant movement between the West Garo Hills and Nokrek
National Park.
Apart from the above four major populations, there are a few isolated habitats
Fig. 7.01: A view of New Ram Terang, the inhabitants of which were relocated from a site in the middle
of the Kalapahar-Daigrung Corridor
430 431
432
Elephant corridors in North-East India – Part I

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
433
Elephant corridors in North-East India – Part II

Elephant corridors in North-East India – Part III
Fig. 7.02: A herd of elephants in the old Ram Terang village
434 435
7.01
Pakke - Doimara at TipPi
This corridor connects Pakke Tiger Reserve with Doimara Reserve Forest of
Khellong Forest Division. Earlier, elephants used to cross the Kameng River near
Tippi village, Tippi Forest Range Office and the Orchid Research Centre. This
3D map showing the landscape of the Pakke-Doimara at Tippi Corridor

route has almost been blocked by encroachments and other physical barriers
and the elephants, since the last five years, cross the highway near the nullah and
the upcoming Tippi Tourism guest house (about two kilometres from the earlier
location towards Eagle Nest).
Alternate name Tippi Corridor

State Arunachal Pradesh
Connectivity Pakke Tiger Reserve with Doimara
Reserve Forest
Length and Width 1 km and 0.2 km
92° 35’ 35”- 92° 36’ 44” E

Major land use Forest, Kameng River, settlement
Major habitation/settlements Tippi
Forest type Tropical evergreen forest and semi
evergreen forest
area of 0.08 ha. The predominant tree species were Duabanga grandiflora
(36%), Sterospermum chelonoides (11%), Artocarpus lakoocha (11%) and Canarium
436 437
grandiflora (8%). Of these, 10 tree species are elephant food species. Ground
cover vegetation was dominated by grasses (46 %), shrubs (24%), herbs (20 %)
and barren ground (10%). Bamboo patches (Bambusa spp) were available in
plenty in this corridor forest.

Pakke Tiger Reserve: 134
Khellong Forest Division: 115
(Elephant Census Arunachal Pradesh, 2015).
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical evergreen and semi evergreen forest
Map of the Pakke-Doimara at Tippi Corridor

River: Kameng River
Roadways: NH 229 (Bhalukpong-Bomdila)
Encroachment: Huts along the road

Elephant Reserve: Kameng Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Pakke Tiger Reserve
IBA: Pakke Tiger Reserve (IBA criteria A1, A2)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements and developmental activities: Expansion and developmental activities
in and around Tippi village, Orchid Research Centre, the General Reserve Engineer
Force (Border Roads Organisation) office and the BSNL office, and encroachments
along NH 229 have severely threatened the corridor and almost blocked elephant
movement. Hence, elephant movement is also happening north of this area near
the Tippi Tourism guest house.
438 439
2. Cultivation: Cultivation of paddy in the corridor is another threat to the habitat. 3. The construction of concrete walls should not be allowed on either side of
NH 229 in the stretch passing through the corridor.
3. Concrete wall: A crash barrier along NH 229, as well as the boundary walls of the
Orchid Research Centre and Tippi Tourism guest house have severely hindered 4. All temporary houses that have emerged due to road construction work along
elephant movement. the national highway could be removed.
4. High vehicular traffic: There is heavy traffic on NH 229 (Bhalukpong-Bomdila), 5. Construction, developmental activities and land use change should be strictly
which bisects this corridor. On average, 64.20 vehicles per hour ply on this road, prohibited in the corridor area. No LPC (Land Possession Certificate) should be
with 47.2 vehicles per hour plying between 6 pm and 6 am. provided by the district administration on forest land.
Corridor dependent villages: There are 235 permanent houses at Tippi village,
with a human population of about 966. There are also encroachments (80
temporary houses) along NH 229 near the Orchid Research Centre. Most of the
inhabitants here are road construction labourers and have been staying here
for over five years. Because of these settlements and encroachments, elephants
now move from about two kilometres north of the Orchid Research Centre, near
the upcoming Tippi Tourism guest house.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Two human deaths caused by elephants were

recorded in 2004 and 2005. In 2013, the steel gate of the Orchid Research Centre
was damaged by elephants. Since then no cases of conflict have been reported
in the corridor area.
CONSERVATION PLAN
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent encroachment of the
corridor forest, illegal tree felling and developmental activities hindering elephant
movement.
2. The Tippi Tourism guest house should be shifted away from the corridor as it
is in the direct path of elephant movement.
Fig. 7.03: Settlements and developmental activities in corridor areas hinder free elephant movement
440 441
7.02
Pakke- Doimara at Dadzu-Lumia
This corridor connects the elephant habitats between Pakke Tiger Reserve and
Doimara Reserve Forest of Khellong Forest Division. Elephants cross the Kameng
3D map showing the landscape of the Pakke-Doimara at Dadzu-Lumia Corridor

River near Dhuwang nullah which extends up to 600 metres towards Tippi. The
area is relatively plain and seasonally used by elephants. The corridor has been
threatened by encroachment and shifting cultivation, as well as the construction
of a small structure as part of the proposed ITBP camp in the corridor.
Alternate name Pakke-Doimara at Dezling

Connectivity Pakke Tiger Reserve with Khellong
Forest Division
92° 37’ 17”- 92° 38’ 11” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and/or Community

Land
Major land use Forest, agriculture, river
Forest type Tropical evergreen and semi
evergreen forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; seasonal
area of 0.16 ha in the corridor forest, of which 10 are palatable to elephants.
The predominant species were Duabanga grandiflora (30%), Altingia excels (11%),
442 443
Gmelina arborea (11%), Oroxylum indicum (L) (13%). Other species included
Terminalia bellerica, Dillenia indica, Bauhinia spp, Emblica officinalis etc. Grasses
(40%) dominated the ground cover, followed by herbs (35%), shrubs (20%) and
barren ground (5%).

(Elephant Census Arunachal Pradesh, 2015)
Forest/Land use
Map of the Pakke-Doimara at Dadzu-Lumia Corridor

Forest Type: Tropical evergreen and semi evergreen forest dominated by Tectona
grandis and Eucalyptus
River: Kameng
Road: National Highway 229
Agriculture: Shifting cultivation (jhumming)

Elephant Range: Kameng Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements and encroachment: Expansion of the Upper Bhalukpong and Tippi
villages and emerging temporary settlements (encroachments) towards the
corridor area are major threats to the corridor.
2. Cultivation inside the corridor forest is a severe threat to the elephant habitat and
the connecting corridor forest. A large part of the corridor area, especially at its
bottleneck (on both sides of NH 229) is under cultivation .
444 445
3. High vehicular traffic on NH 229 (Bhalukpong-Tawang) is a threat to the free corridor is a major threat and this has to be regulated and stopped, especially in
movement of elephants. On average, 64 vehicles per hour ply on this road during the bottleneck portion near Kameng River.
the day. About 47 vehicles per hour ply between 6 pm and 6 am. Concrete
side walls (crash barriers) along NH 229 in the corridor also hinder elephant 3. No LPC (Land Possession Certificate) should be provided by the district
movement. administration on corridor forest land.
4. ITBP camp: There is a proposal to set up an ITBP camp in a 35-hectare area of 4. Construction and developmental activities that hinder elephant movement
the corridor, which will further threaten the movement of elephants and other in the corridor should be strictly prohibited. Illegal tree felling for personal and
wild animals. A small structure has already been constructed along the highway. commercial purposes should be controlled in the corridor forest.
5. Boulder extraction from the Kameng River near the corridor is another issue. 5. Boulder extraction should be banned along the Kameng River in the corridor
area.
Corridor dependent villages: Upper Bhalukpong and Tippi.
6. Concrete walls (crash barriers) constructed on either side of NH 229 should be
There is no village located inside the corridor. Upper Bhalukpong is located very removed in the area passing through the corridor. Vehicle speeds also need to
close to the corridor and has about 348 households with a population of 1551 be regulated by appropriate speed-breakers in the corridor.
individuals. Tippi has about 235 permanent houses and 80 temporary houses
(encroached).
Human-Elephant Conflict: Not high. Crop depredation by elephants in and

around the corridor area is reported every year. However, no incidents of human
death or injury have been reported in the last five years.
CONSERVATION PLAN
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent the encroachment of
movement. In consultation with villagers, the corridor area can be notified as a
Community Conserved Area.
2. All encroachments upon corridor land could be removed at the earliest in

consultation with the community members (tribes and others). Cultivation in the Fig. 7.04: Crash barriers on NH 229 restrict the free movement of elephants
446 447
7.03
Pakke - Papum at Longka Nullah
This narrow corridor connects the elephant habitats within Papum Reserve Forest
of Pakke Tiger Reserve. Elephants cross the Pakke River near the Longka nullah
3D map showing the landscape of the Pakke –Papum at Longka nullah Corridor
forest guest house. This movement path is regularly used by elephants.
Alternate name Longka nullah

Connectivity Western and Eastern side of Papum
Reserve Forest
Length and Width 0.5 km and 0.8 km
93° 1’ 44”- 93° 2’ 51” E

Major land use Forest, forest plantation
Major habitation/settlements Longka village and Longka forest guest
house
evergreen forest
area of 0.08 ha in the corridor forest, of which four species are palatable to
elephants. The predominant tree species were Duabanga grandiflora (34%), Dillenia
indica (12%), Gmelina arborea (14%) and Altingia excels (12%). Imperata cylindrica (L)
grass was abundant especially along the nullahs. The ground cover was found
to consist of grasses (40%), shrubs (25%), herbs (25%) and barren ground (10%).
448 449

Forest/Land use
Legal status of corridor forest: Reserve Forest
Forest: Tropical evergreen and semi evergreen forest, mostly forest plantation
Settlement: Longka village
River: Pakke River and Longka nullah
Agriculture: Jhum cultivation of paddy
Map of the Pakke –Papum at Longka nullah Corridor

Artefacts: Forest guest house

Mountain range: Eastern Himalayas
Elephant Reserve: Kameng Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: The number of houses in Longka and Jolly villages has been
increasing and so has the biotic pressure exerted on the corridor forest. In the
last five years about 12 new houses have been built in this area.
2. Cultivation: Shifting cultivation of paddy has fragmented the elephant habitat.
3. Illegal felling: Illegal felling of trees for timber and fuelwood near the old plantation
area of Papum Reserve Forest will affect the diurnal movement of elephants apart
from decreasing the quality of the corridor forest.
450 451
Corridor villages: Longka
Longka is located in the corridor area. It has eight families with a population of
about 92 people.
Corridor dependent villages: Jolly
Jolly village is located on the corridor fringe and has about 37 families and a
population of 208. A majority of the population depends on agriculture for
sustenance. Four families from Longka have moved to Jolly village.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Crop depredation by elephants happens every year

during the cropping season. Five cases of human injury and two elephant deaths
were reported between 2002-03 and 2011-12.
Fig. 7.05: Groundtruthing of the corridor by a WTI team member

CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department under an
appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent the encroachment of the
movement.
2. Longka village needs to be fenced off.
3. Cultivation should be controlled in the corridor area and Papum Reserve Forest.
4. Illegal tree felling for commercial purposes should be strictly prohibited in the
corridor forest. The Gore Abbe Society could be involved for protection of forests
and sensitisation of people.
5. The Grain-for-Grain initiative could be provided as ex-gratia support to manage

Fig. 7.06: Longka village within the corridor
452 453
7.04
Pakke- Papum at Seijosa nullah
This corridor connects Pakke Tiger Reserve with Papum Reserve Forest. Elephants
3D map showing the landscape of the Pakke-Papum at Seijosa Nullah Corridor

cross the Pakke River and move to Papum Reserve Forest through the Seijosa
nullah near Lower Bali village, and also through A2 / Yarason nullah near A2 block
and Mebuso 2. Elephants mostly pass through the two nullahs in the corridor.
Alternate name Seijosa nullah

Connectivity Pakke Tiger Reserve with Papum
Reserve Forest
93° 0’ 49”- 93° 2’ 2” E
Legal status Community Land, Forest

Major land use Forest, agriculture and settlement
Major habitation/settlements Lower Bali, Upper Bali and Mebuso 2
Forest type Tropical evergreen forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; through the year
area of 0.08 ha. The predominant tree species were Duabanga grandiflora (36%),
Sterospermum chelonoides (11%), Artocarpus lakoocha (11%,) and Canarium
grandiflora (8%). Of these, 10 species are elephant food species.
454 455

Forest/Land use:
Forest Type: Tropical evergreen forest
Settlement: Lower Bali, Upper Bali, Mebuso 2
Agricultural land
River: Pakke River, Seijosa nullah and A2/ Yarason nullah
Map of the Pakke-Papum at Seijosa Nullah Corridor

Elephant Reserve Name: Kameng Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: The increasing population of Mebuso 2, Lower Bali and Upper
Bali villages and their biotic pressure (NTFP and fuelwood collection) is a threat.
Bamboo is collected from the forest in large quantities.
2. Cultivation: Cultivation near the corridor area degrades the corridor and also
attracts elephants near human settlements.
3. Electric fencing around Pakke Jungle Camp adjacent to the corridor hinders
animal movement.
4. Illegal felling of trees inside Papum Reserve Forest and along the Seijosa nullah.
456 457
5. Seijosa Road Bridge: An upcoming road bridge over the Seijosa nullah will 4. Shifting cultivation and rubber and tea plantations inside the Papum Reserve
increase vehicular traffic and other biotic pressure. Forest should be controlled with the assistance of the Ghora Abhe Society.
6. Rubber and tea plantations in the Papum Reserve Forest 5. Prevent further expansion of the Pakke Jungle Camp within the corridor area.
Corridor villages: Lower Bali, Upper Bali, Mebuso 2 6. Grain-for-Grain initiative could be provided as ex-gratia support to manage
Corridor dependent villages: Part of Lower Bali and Mebuso 2
7. Support for the Paga Festival could be provided as a confidence-building
Human-Elephant Conflict: Crop depredation by elephants is a major concern measure.
for the villagers as well as the forest department. Seven human injuries and two
elephant deaths were reported between 2002 and 2010 near the corridor.
CONSERVATION PLAN
corridor forest and developmental activities hindering elephant movement. The
possibility to declare this as a Community Reserve/CCA could be explored with the
Ghora Abhe Society.
2. Illegal tree felling in the corridor forest for commercial purposes should be
strictly prohibited. Illegal bamboo extraction should also be controlled in the
corridor area.
3. Habitat restoration in degraded areas of Papum Reserve Forest has to be

undertaken on a priority basis. The Ghora Abhe Society could be involved to
facilitate this process.
4. Institutional and capacity-building support should be provided to Eco-

Development Committees (EDC) to empower them and garner their support for
conservation.
Fig. 7.07: A view of the corridor landscape
458 459
7.05
Durpong – Doimukh at Khundakuwa
This corridor connects Durpong Reserve Forest with Doimukh Reserve Forest of
3D map showing the landscape of the Durpong – Doimukh at Khundakuwa Corridor

Banderdewa Forest Division. Elephants generally cross the Dikrong River through
Khundakuwa nullah to move between these forest areas. National Highway 52A
connecting Banderdewa to Itanagar, a railway track connecting Harmooty (Assam)
to Naharlagun (Arunachal Pradesh), and the Harmooty-Doimukh road pass
through the corridor. Ranga and Golajuli villages and their agricultural lands are
also located within the corridor.
Alternate name Karsinga

Connectivity Durpong Reserve forest and Doimukh
Reserve forest of Banderdewa Forest
Division
93° 47’ 0”- 93° 49’ 14” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Private Land

Major land use Forest, agriculture, settlements and
river
Major habitation/settlements Khundakuwa and Naobhanga
(encroachments), Ranga and Golajuli
460 461
Corridor habitat status: A total of 20 tree species and a bamboo species (Bambusa
balcooa) were recorded in the sampled area of 0.08 ha. Of these, seven species
are palatable to elephants. The predominant tree species were Gmelina arborea
(12%), Dillenia indica (9%), Oroxylum indicum (L) (9%) and Terminalia sp (9%). The
proportion of ground cover vegetation was: grasses (37%), shrubs (27%), herbs
(24%) and barren ground (12%).

Banderdewa Forest Division: 192
Map of the Durpong – Doimukh at Khundakuwa Corridor

Ranga Reserve Forest of Lakhimpur Forest Division: 77
(Elephant Census Arunachal Pradesh, 2015 and Elephant Census Assam 2011)
Forest/Land use
Settlements: Khundakuwa nullah and Naobhanga nullah (encroachments), Golajuli
and Ranga villages
Agriculture: Paddy
Road: NH 52A and Harmooty-Doimukh road
Railway track: Harmooty to Naharlagun
River: Dikrong River

Elephant Reserve Name: Kameng Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Khundakuwa nullah, Naobhanga nullah, Golajuli and Ranga villages.

Two new church settlements have come up in Khundakuwa nullah.
462 463
2. Encroachment: There are 16 houses on encroached land at Khundakuwa nullah, CONSERVATION PLAN
established about five years back. Another encroachment with 25 houses is at
Naobhanga nullah in the corridor area. 1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department under
3. Concrete wall: The concrete wall constructed to check water flow in the nullahs corridor forest, illegal tree felling and developmental activities hindering elephant
and create space for houses is hindering elephant movement. movement.
4. Cultivation: Cultivation practices in and around the Durpong Reserve Forest. 2. Illegal tree felling and bamboo extraction for commercial purposes should
be strictly prohibited inside Durpong Reserve Forest, Doimukh Reserve Forest
5. Mining: Boulder mining along the Naobhanga nullah and sand mining at Dikrong and Ranga Reserve Forest. Habitat restoration needs to be undertaken in these
River. reserves.
6. High vehicular traffic: National Highway 52A passes through the corridor. On 3. Encroachments in Khundakuwa nullah (16 families) should be removed on a
average, 51.20 vehicles per hour ply on this road during the day. About 38.85 priority basis by Banderdewa Forest Division.
vehicles per hour ply between 6 pm and 6 am. Widening of the highway has
further affected the corridor. 4. Vehicular speeds on NH 52 should be regulated by the use of suitable physical
barriers at night.
7. Railway track: A new railway track connects Harmooty and Naharlagun towns.
The elevated railway line has hindered elephant movement. 5. Cultivation should be controlled inside corridor areas.
Corridor villages: Khundakuwa nullah (16 households), Khundakuwa (38 6. The concrete wall constructed by the sides of the Khundakuwa and Naobhanga
households), Naobhanga (48 households), Golajuli (65 households) and Ranga nullahs should be modified to facilitate elephant movement along the riverbed.
(55 households).
7. Illegal sand and boulder mining along the Dikrong River and Naobhanga nullah in
Corridor dependent villages: Khundakuwa, Naobhanga, Golajuli and Ranga the corridor area should be stopped immediately by Banderdewa Forest Division.
villages.
Human-Elephant Conflict: The incidence of human-elephant conflict has reduced

as corridor usage by elephants is now rare. About 12 human deaths caused by
elephants were reported between 2007 and 2014 in the region.
464 465
7.06
Dulung - Subansiri
The Dulung-Subansiri corridor connects Panir Reserve Forest (Banderdewa

Division, Arunachal Pradesh) and Dulung Reserve Forest with Subansiri Reserve
Forest (Lakhimpur Forest Division, Assam). It is situated just south of the Subansiri
3D map showing the landscape of the Dulung- Subansiri Corridor

hydro-electric site near Gerukamukh. It is a vital link between the elephant habitats
of the east and west banks of the Subansiri River. Due to the steep and rough
terrain, there is little chance of elephant movement to the north of this corridor
(towards Tale Valley Wildlife Sanctuary). Elephants move to Subansiri Reserve
Forest through Dulung village, Subansiri River, Jababari Island and Ghora Island.
Elephant movement has drastically reduced over the years.
Alternate name Dulung

State Assam and Arunachal Pradesh
Connectivity Panir Reserve Forest and Dulung
Reserve Forest with Subansiri Reserve
Forest
Length and Width 3.5 km and 0.5-1 km
94° 14’ 11”- 94° 17’ 20” E

Major land use Agriculture, forest, settlement, river,
island and Air Force firing range
Major habitation/settlements Jababari island
evergreen forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional; during cropping season
466 467
area of 0.08 ha in the corridor forest. Of these, five tree species are palatable
to elephants. The predominant species were Ziziphus jujuba (31%), Dillenia indica
(15%), Gmelina arborea (12%) and Oroxylum indicum (9%).
Ground cover was found to consist of grasses (43%), shrubs (20%), herbs (24%)
and barren ground (13%).
Map of the Dulung- Subansiri Corridor showing the land to be secured

Banderdewa Forest Division: 192
Subansiri Range of Lakhimpur Forest Division: 40
Lakhimpur Forest Division: 121
(Elephant Census Arunachal Pradesh, 2015 and Elephant Census Assam, 2011)
Forest/Land use
Legal status: Reserve Forest
Forest type: Tropical semi evergreen forest
Settlement: Jababari island
Agriculture land: Dulungmukh
River: Subansiri River and Dulung River

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Eight houses at Jababari island and a cattle shed are in the corridor.
2. Agriculture: Agricultural activities in Jababari island and Dulungmukh village

hinder the free movement of elephant.
470 469
3. Tree felling: Tree felling in Ghora and Jababari islands. 5. Boulder collection in the Dulung River should be prohibited inside the corridor
area.
4. Boulder collection: Boulder collection from the Dulung River.
6. Overgrazing should be controlled near corridor areas. Habitat restoration
5. An Air Force firing range in Dulung Reserve Forest is located in the corridor, needs to be undertaken in the barren land located in the islands.
hindering elephant movement.
7. Hydrologic regulation: plan to be made with National Hydroelectric Power
6. Tea garden: Ananda Tea Garden and its labour colonies are located in the Corporation (NHPC).
corridor area.
7. Dam: The upcoming Subansiri hydro-electric dam near Gerukamukh.
Corridor villages: Jababari Island (eight households)
Corridor dependent Villages: Kalaptakur (65 households), Ananda Tea Garden

colony (100 households) and Dulungmukh (125 households)
CONSERVATION PLAN
movement.
2. About eight houses (encroachments) in Jababari island should be removed by

Bandardewa Forest Division.
3. Illegal timber felling inside Ghora and Jababari islands for personal and
commercial purposes should be strictly prohibited.
Fig. 7.08: Dulung - Subansiri corridor landscape
4. In consultation with the Air Force, bombing practice should be stopped during
the elephant migratory season (October to February).
470 471
7.07
D’Ering – Mebo at Sigar Nullah
This corridor connects the D’ering Memorial Wildlife Sanctuary and Mebo Reserve
3D map showing the landscape of the D’Ering-Mebo at Sigar Nullah Corridor

Forest of Pasighat Forest Division on either side of the Siang River. Elephants move
adjacent to Sigar village and many private forest lands, to Dibang Forest Division
through Aohali village. The corridor is extensively used by elephants.
Alternate name Sigar nullah

Connectivity D’Ering Memorial Wildlife Sanctuary
and Mebo Reserve Forest
95° 21’ 25”- 95° 23’ 6” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Community Land

Major land use Forest, river and agricultural
Major habitation/settlements Sigar
area of 0.08 ha. Of these, five are elephant food species. The predominant species
were Anthocephalus chinensis (35%), Albizzia procera (23%), Oroxylum indicum (L)
(15%) and Dillenia indica (11%). Other species include Pterospermum acerifolium,
Terminalia myriocarpa, Kydia calycina, Bombax ceiba, Gymnema arborea, Mallotus
philippensis and Aesculus assamica.
472 473
The ground cover was dominated by grasses (Saccharum longisetosum,

S Spontaneum, 37%), shrubs (27%), herbs (24%) and barren ground (12%).

Pasighat Forest Division: 144
D’Ering Wildlife Sanctuary: 61
Dibang Forest Division: 113
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical Evergreen Forest
River: Siang
Map of the D’Ering –Mebo at Sigar Nullah Corridor

Agricultural land
Settlement: Sigar village

Protected Area: D’Ering Memorial Wildlife sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
Settlements and agricultural practices: The expansion of settlements at Sigar village
in the corridor as well as the encroachment of certain other areas, and an increase
in agricultural activity near the corridor.
Corridor village: Sigar with about 64 households and a population of 400.
Corridor dependent villages: Ralling (38 households with a population of 350) and
New Borghuli (36 households with a population of 150).
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict occurs mainly due to crop depredation by

elephants and is a major issue for the villagers.
474 475
CONSERVATION PLAN
movement.
2. Prevent encroachment and new settlements in the corridor area and control
Fig. 7.09: Agricultural activity in the village of Sigar, located within the corridor area
the expansion of agricultural practices near the corridor area.
3. Efforts should be made to prevent illegal felling of trees in the corridor area and
in the community forest.
Fig. 7.08: Meeting with community members of corridor and corridor-dependent villages
476 477
7.08
D’Ering – Dibru Saikhowa
This corridor connects the D’ering Memorial Wildlife Sanctuary (Arunachal

Pradesh) with Dibru Saikhowa National Park (Assam) via the forest patches of the
Sadiya Forest Range of Doom Dooma Forest Division. Elephants move through
3D map showing the landscape of the D’Ering – Dibru Saikhowa corridor

community lands, settlements (some encroached), agricultural lands, and the
flood plains of the Siang, Dibang and Lohit Rivers, which lie between these two
Protected Areas.
State Arunachal Pradesh and Assam

Connectivity D’Ering Memorial Wildlife Sanctuary
and Dibru Saikhowa National Park
95° 27’ 50”- 95° 33’ 15” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Community Land,

Private Land
Major land use Forest, flood plain, river, agricultural
land, settlements
Major habitation/settlements Mer, Gadum, Paglam, Laimukri,
Amorpur, Chilling No 2
Forest type Assam alluvial plain semi evergreen
forest and riverine forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; seasonal (October- February)
Corridor habitat status: The corridor forest is in the flood plains of the Siang,
Dibang and Lohit Rivers. The vegetation is mostly grassland (Phragmites karka,
Saccharum spontaneum, S arundinaceum, Erianthus ravannae). Tree species towards
478 479
D’ering Wildlife Sanctuary are generally represented by Albizzia procera and

Zizyphus Mauritania. The grass species towards Dibru Saikhowa are represented
by Imperata cylindrical, Phragmaties karka, Erianthus ravanea and saccharum.

Pasighat Forest Division: 144
D’Ering Wildlife Sanctuary: 61
Dibru Saikhowa National Park: 115
(Elephant Census Arunachal Pradesh, 2015 and Assam, 2011-12)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Assam alluvial plain semi evergreen forest and riverine forest
Map of the D’ering – Dibru Saikhowa corridor

River: Siang, Dibang and Lohit Rivers
Agricultural land
Settlement: Mer, Gadum, Paglam, Laimekuri, Amorpur and Chilling No 2
Other Ecological importance

Protected Area: D’Ering Wildlife Sanctuary and Dibru Saikhowa National Park
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Mer, Gadum, Paglam, Laimekuri, Amorpur and Chilling No 2
settlements, as well as some encroached land in Assam. Biotic pressure results
from the collection of grasses for thatching in houses and fodder for livestock, as
well as fuelwood collection. This has degraded the corridor habitat and threatened
elephant movement.
2. Increased human-elephant conflict: Two elephants were killed in 2013 in retaliation

for crop depredation in the Siang area.
480 481
Corridor dependent villages: Mer (120 households), Gadum (60 households),

Namsing (299 households) and Paglam (200 households) in Arunachal Pradesh.
Laimekuri (28 households), Estum (130 households), Amorpur (138 households),

Chilling No 2 (11 households), Kaling, Ghospuri, Kheroni, Baro-Ghoria (120
households) in Assam.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict occurs every year in the corridor area, both
in Arunachal Pradesh and Assam. According to reports from the Sadiya Range of
Doomdooma Forest Division, in 2015-16 there were two human deaths due to
elephants, 105 hectares of crop depredation, and about 30 houses damaged by
Fig. 7.10: The corridor landscape and river system

elephants in the corridor. In the Mebo Forest Division in Arunachal Pradesh, four
people lost their lives due to elephants between 2011 and 2015, and an average
of 50 hectares of crops are damaged annually by elephants in the region.
CONSERVATION PLAN
movement.
2. At least 400 hectares of corridor land needs to be declared as a Community

Reserve in consultation with villagers.
3. Prevent encroachment and new settlements in the corridor area, especially

towards Assam.
4. Provide support to local communities to improve their livelihood, and minimise

human-elephant conflict through appropriate measures in corridor and fringe
villages.
5. Control the expansion of agricultural practices in and near the corridor area.
482 483
7.09
Kotha - Burihiding
This corridor connects the Kotha Reserve Forest (Digboi Forest Division) and
adjacent elephant populations of Changlang district of Arunachal Pradesh with
the Burihiding Reserve Forest (Doomdooma Forest Division), thereby maintaining
a linkage with the Terai Reserve Forest, Kakojan Reserve Forest and Nalani Reserve
3D map showing the landscape of the Kotha-Burihiding Corridor

Forest. Elephants cross the Burihiding River near the Kotha Kakharani settlement
and pass through small tea gardens and agricultural land to enter Burihiding
Reserve Forest.
State Assam
Connectivity Digboi Forest Division with
Doomdooma Forest Division
95° 50’ 15”- 95° 51’ 56” E
Legal status Private Land, Reserve Forest and land

Major land use Tea gardens, forest, settlements and
agriculture
Major habitation/settlements Encroached settlements - Tekerigaon,
Kotha Kakharani, Ahompathar
Forest type Tropical semi evergreen forest
Corridor habitat status: A total of 14 tree species were recorded in the corridor
forest. Of these, five were palatable to elephants. The predominant species found
in this area were Lagerstroemia reginae (17%), Dillenia indica (12%), Gmelina arborea
484 485
(14%) and Canarium resiniferum (9%). Ground cover consisted of grasses (40%),
shrubs (23%), herbs (23%) and barren ground (14%).

Digboi Forest Division: 124
Doomdooma Forest Division: 175
(Elephant Census Assam, 2011)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical semi evergreen forest.
Tea gardens: Kotha Tea Garden, and fragmented tea gardens in Kotha, Udaypur,
Ahompathar
Settlements: Tekerigaon, Kotha Kakharani, Ahompathar
Map of the the Kotha-Burihiding Corridor

River: Kharam, Deodubi nullah
Roads: Village roads
Buildings and Artefacts: Brick kilns

Elephant Reserve Name: Dihing-Patkai Elephant Reserve
Nearest Protected area: Dihing Patkai Wildlife Sanctuary
Biodiversity Hotspot: (Indo-Burma)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Encroachment of corridor areas towards Buridihing Reserve
Forest. Expansion and biotic pressure (fuelwood and timber extraction and cattle
grazing) from adjacent villages of Kotha Reserve Forest (Kotha Kakharani, Rampur,
Ahompathar, Tekerigaon and Kothaa Darkho) has affected the corridor forest and
2. Deforestation: Deforestation of habitat in both the reserve forests, especially
486 487
Buridihing Reserve Forest, due to extraction of fuelwood, timber and cattle grazing. 3. Agricultural practices near the corridor area need to be controlled and regulated.
3. Factories: Indiscriminate growth of brick kilns in the corridor area is hindering 4. Cattle grazing should be prohibited inside the Kotha Reserve Forest to improve
elephant movement. habitat.
4. Tea gardens: There is a possibility of encroachment upon forest areas in future 5. Brick kilns in the corridor area should be closed and the habitat restored.
by the small tea planters and their labour colonies, which are located close to
forest areas. 6. Land use change should be strictly prohibited in tea gardens located in and
around the corridor area.
5. Agriculture: Increased cultivation of paddy and other crops in the corridor area.
Corridor villages: The corridor has Tekerigaon, Kotha Kakharani (36 families),
Ahompathar (33 families) and tea garden labour lines within its area. It is also
surrounded by other villages (Kotha, Udaypur, Rampur) and labour lines of tea
gardens.
Corridor dependent villages: Kotha Tea Garden labour colony, Kotha village,
Udaypur village, Rampur village.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Most cases of conflict are due to crop depredation by

elephants. Three human deaths were reported between 2009 and 2013.
CONSERVATION PLAN
encroachment, illegal felling of trees and developmental activities detrimental to
animal movement.
2. Further encroachment of corridor forest should be prevented and the already

encroached land in Buridihing Reserve Forest cleared by the forest department.
488 489
7.10
Upper Dihing East - Upper Dihing West
Block At Bogapani
3D map showing the landscape of the Upper Dihing East- Upper Dihing West Block at Bogapani Corridor
This corridor connects the East and West Blocks of Upper Dihing Reserve Forest
in Digboi Forest Division. Elephants move through Bogapani Tea Gardens,
agricultural fields and human habitations once they have crossed NH 38 and the
railway track near Ramnagar village. This railway track has caused the death of
nine elephants between 2001 and 2015 and, along with the national highway, is a
major impediment to elephant movement in the corridor.
Alternate Name Bogapani

State Assam
Connectivity Upper Dihing East - Upper Dihing West
block
Length and Width 2.5-3 km and 0.5-1 km
95° 33’ 13”- 95° 38’ 5” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, land leased to Tea

Garden and Patta Land
Major land use Tea garden, forest, settlement and
agriculture
Major habitation/settlements Bogapani, Borbil-1 and 2, Panbari
Forest type Tropical semi evergreen, plantation
and agriculture land
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular (Seasonal; September to
February)
490 491
Corridor habitat status: A major part of the corridor passes through Bogapani
Tea Garden. About ten species of plants were recorded in the sampled area of
0.08 ha. The common ones include Dipterocarpus macrocarpus, Shorea assamica,
Ailanthus integrifolia, Castanopsis indica, Mallotus philippinensis etc.
Map of the Upper Dihing East- Upper Dihing West Block At Bogapani Corridor
Forest/Land use
Tea garden: Bogapani
Settlements: Bogapani, Borbil-1 and 2, Panbari
Railway: Dibrugarh-Tinsukia-Dimapur
Highway: NH 38 (Digboi-Margherita)
Artefacts: High-voltage power line

Mountain Range: Patkai
Elephant Reserve: Dihing-Patkai Elephant Reserve
Nearest Protected area: Dihing-Patkai Wildlife Sanctuary
Biodiversity Hotspot: Indo-Burma
IBA: The Upper Dihing West Complex (IBA Site No. IN-AS-45)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements and development activities: Expansion and development activities in
and around Bogapani, Ramnagar and Borbil-1. Encroachments along NH 38 and
the railway line near the corridor pose a severe threat to the corridor and are a
hindrance to the free movement of elephants.
492 493
2. Vehicular traffic: National Highway 38 bisects the corridor at Bogapani Tea encroachment, illegal felling of trees and developmental activities detrimental to
Garden. On average, 85-90 vehicles per hour ply on this road. The average animal movement. The corridor area could be notified as Ecologically Fragile Land
between 6 pm and 6 am is 45-50 vehicles per hour. There is a plan to route a (EFL) for legal protection and to prevent further fragmentation.
bypass through the corridor area, which will further fragment the corridor.
2. Prevent further encroachment of land between NH 38 and the railway line and
3. Railway track: A track of the North Frontier Railway connecting Tinsukia and Lidu other parts of the corridor. Existing encroachments in elephant crossing points
passes through the corridor. A total of nine elephants have died in train-hits in should be removed on a priority basis.
three different incidents in the corridor between 2001 and 2015.
3. Regulating the speed of trains passing through the corridor, especially between
4. Encroachment along the railway track (between the railway track and the national 6 pm and 6 am, is essential.
highway) has further fragmented the corridor, hindering elephant movement.
4. The construction of a flyover (about 1.2 km long) for vehicles on NH 38 is
5. Tea garden: Barbed wire fencing along the boundary of Bogapani Tea Garden required. Till this is constructed, vehicular speeds should be restricted by suitable
hinders elephant movement. physical barriers in the corridor area from 6 pm to 6 am. No realignment of the
road should be allowed through the corridor forest.
6. High-voltage terminal located inside Bogapani Tea Garden is a potential threat
to elephant movement. 5. Fencing along the fringes of Bogapani Tea Garden in the corridor area should
be removed.
Corridor villages: Bogapani (875 families), Borbil-1 (549 families) and Borbil-2,
Panbari and encroachment along the railway track are present within the corridor.
Ramnagar and Borbilgaon 3 are on the fringes.
Corridor dependent villages: Bogapani labour colony, Panbari, Ramnagar and

encroached areas, Borbilgaon 1 and Borbilgaon 3 (696 families).
Human-Elephant Conflict: Crop depredation by elephants is a major concern in

the corridor area and fringe villages. Four human deaths caused by elephants
were reported from the region between 2001 and 2012.
CONSERVATION PLAN
494 495
7.11
Upper Dihing East - Upper Dihing West
Block between Golai-Pawai
3D map showing the landscape of the Upper Dihing East-Upper Dihing West Block between Golai-Pawai Corridor
The corridor connects the East and West Blocks of Upper Dihing Reserve Forest of
Digboi Forest Division. Elephants move through tea gardens, agriculture fields and
human habitations once they have crossed NH 38 and the railway track between
Golai Basti No.1 and No.2 villages. The construction of houses, the boundary wall
of the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) terminal and other artefacts have severely
State Assam
Connectivity Upper Dihing East and West block
95° 36’ 45”- 95° 40’ 17” E
Legal status Patta Land and Reserve Forest

Major land use Tea garden, settlement and
agriculture field
Major habitation/settlements Golai No.2, Baruphotia, Navajyoti
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular but minimised, Bulls and
herds
Corridor habitat status: A major part of the corridor is devoid of natural

vegetation and passes through tea gardens, human settlements, agricultural land
and degraded lands.
496 497

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical evergreen forest
Tea Garden: Amalgamated Tea Company and small tea gardens
Map of the Upper Dihing East- Upper Dihing West Block between Golai-Pawai Corridor
Settlements: Part of Golai No.2, Baruphotia, Navajyoti
Railway: Dibrugarh-Tinsukia-Dimapur
Highway: NH 38 (Digboi-Margherita)

Mountain range: Patkai
Elephant Reserve: Dihing-Patkai Elephant Reserve
Nearest Protected Area: Dihing-Patkai wildlife Sanctuary
IBA: The Upper Dihing West Complex (IBA Site No. IN-AS-45)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements and developmental activities: Expansion and developmental activities
in and around the corridor, encroachments along the NH 38 and the railway line
passing through the corridor all pose a severe threat and have almost blocked the
elephant movement.
2. Vehicular traffic: National Highway 38 connecting Tinsukia to Margherita bisects

the corridor at Bogapani Tea Garden. On average, 85-90 vehicles per hour ply on
this road. The average between 6 pm and 6 am is 45-50 vehicles per hour.
3. Railway track: A track of the North Frontier Railway connecting Tinsukia and Lidu
passes through the corridor.
498 499
4. Tea gardens: Amalgamated Tea Company and smaller tea gardens are located 3. The corridor conservation plan suggested by the forest department and experts
in the corridor. should be properly implemented in the IOC land within the corridor.
5. A boundary wall had been constructed for the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) 4. Fencing should be prohibited in Powai Tea Garden located in the corridor area.
terminal adjacent to the corridor. The wall inside the corridor area was later
demolished to facilitate elephant movement after the state and central 5. The construction of a flyover for vehicles on NH 38 is required. Till this is done,
governments, locals and NGOs raised objections. vehicular speeds should be restricted by suitable physical barriers in the corridor
area from 6 pm to 6 am.
6. New dhabas/hotels have come up along the road in the corridor, catering to the
needs of tea garden and refinery workers as well as travellers.
Corridor villages: The corridor has parts of Golai No.2, Baruphotia and Navajyoti
(new settlement) within its area.
Corridor dependent villages: Golai No.3 (160 families), Golai No.4 (52 families),
Golai No.5 (223 families), Baruphotia, Navajyoti (new settlement).
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict has reduced over the years; elephants and
other wild animals use the corridor less due to the large human population in and
around the corridor area. Two human deaths and six elephant mortality cases
were reported between 2002 and 2006.
CONSERVATION PLAN
encroachment, illegal felling of trees and developmental activities detrimental to
animal movement.
2. Construction of houses within the corridor should be stopped. A few families

that are in the direct path of elephant movement could be relocated. Fig. 7.11: Indian Oil Corporation boundary wall in the corridor
500 501
7.12
Kalapahar - Daigrung
This corridor connects Kalapahar Proposed Reserve Forest and Nambor West
Block of East Karbi Anglong Division with Nambor-Daigrung Wildlife Sanctuary
(Nambor North Block in Golaghat District). Elephants move to Kaziranga National
3D map showing the landscape of the Kalapahar-Daigrung Corridor

Park from the Daigrung-Nambor Wildlife Sanctuary via Kaliani Reserve Forest after
crossing the corridor near Ram Terang and Tokolangso villages.
State Assam
Connectivity Kalapahar Proposed Reserve Forest
of East Karbi Anglong Division with
Nambor-Daigrung Wildlife Sanctuary
Length and Width 6.5 km and 0.15 – 2.2 km
93° 46’ 30”- 93° 51’ 41” E
Legal status Proposed Reserve Forest

Major land use Forest, settlements and agriculture
Major habitation/settlements Tokolangso (Ram Terang has been
relocated outside the corridor)
Corridor habitat status: A total of 38 plant species were recorded from the
corridor forest. The dominant plant species were Litsea monopetala, Tetrameles
nodiflora, Erythrina indica, Alstonia scholaris, Syzigium cumini, Toona ciliate etc.
Clemates cadimia, Paederia foetida, Mimosa pudica, Mikenia etc were common non-
tree species found in the corridor area. Ground vegetation was dominated by
grasses and shrubs.
502 503

Karbi Anglong Forest Division: 614
Nambor-Daigrung Wildlife Sanctuary: 68
Kaziranga National Park: 1165
Forest/Land use
Settlement: Tokolangso
Agriculture: Slash and burn, seasonal paddy
Road: Silonijan-Chokihola, village roads
River: Daigrung
Map of the Kalapahar-Daigrung Corridor

Mountain range: Mikir Hills (Karbi Plateau)
Elephant Reserve: Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Daigrung-Nambor Wildlife Sanctuary
and Garampani Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human settlements and expansion of villages: Two villages, namely Ram Terang
and Tokolangso, were situated inside the corridor. Ram Terang was voluntarily
relocated out of the corridor forest in early 2016. Expansion of the corridor and
fringe villages has increased biotic pressure due to timber and fuelwood collection,
apart from agricultural activities. Encroachment of the forest area in Daigrung
Reserve Forest is a major concern.
2. Deforestation: Extraction of timber and firewood from the forest is a major

threat. This has severely degraded the forest cover, especially in the corridor area.
504 505
3. Agriculture activities: Most villagers undertake jhum (slash and burn) cultivation 2. The 19 families of Ram Terang village were voluntarily relocated to New Ram
(paddy, pineapple etc) in the corridor area. This has degraded the habitat. Some Terang on the fringes of the corridor in early 2016. The inhabitants of Tokolangso
of the villagers have also begun planting tea and rubber, clearing the virgin forest village (23 families) within the corridor also have to be voluntarily relocated outside
towards the Tokolangso side of the corridor. the corridor, through the provision of suitable rehabilitation packages.
4. Road traffic: The widening of the Silonijan-Chokihola road has increased the flow 3. Prevent slash and burn cultivation in corridor villages by providing land for
of traffic and is a potential threat. permanent agriculture.
Corridor villages: Ram Terang, with 19 families, was located in the middle of the 4. Undertake habitat restoration in the corridor and forest fringes on a priority
corridor and has now been shifted to New Ram Terang outside the corridor. basis. The Karbi Anglong Forest Department and Wildlife Trust of India have
Its inhabitants had shifted to Ram Terang from the Murpholoni area some 25 already initiated the restoration of the corridor land vacated by Ram Terang village.
years ago due to religious reasons and high elephant depredation. Most of them
were engaged in jhumming and cultivating paddy. Tokolangso village lies on the 5. Undertake suitable eco-development support in the corridor and fringe villages
Daigrung and Nambor side of the forest. The village is under the Nilip constituency to strengthen livelihoods and minimise dependency on corridor forests.
of Nilip Block under the Bokajan Subdivision of Karbi Anglong district. The part of
the village within the corridor comprises 23 households with a population of 140. Note: In Phase-I, Wildlife Trust of India and Elephant Family rehabilitated Ram Terang
village in consultation with the villagers, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council (KAAC) and
Corridor dependent villages: Sar Kro (34 families), Hondem Singnar (33 families), Assam administration. The villagers were provided with 0.35 acres of land per family
Kangbura Terang (28 families), Gudam Kro village, Ram Killing (9 families), Gudam for housing, 1.3 acres of land per family for agriculture, a Karbi traditional house, a
Terrang, Borjan, part of Tokolangso (40 families), Rishakhidi (200 families) and Community Hall and other basic amenities at the relocation site. Rehabilitation of part
Alukhunda (17 families). of Tokolangso village will be undertaken in Phase-II of the project.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is quite severe in the region. Elephants visit

the corridor almost throughout the year to raid crops and other agricultural
produce. There have been no human deaths or retaliatory killings of elephants
in the corridor area, although 33 human deaths due to elephants were reported
from the Silonijan Range between 2001 and 2013.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and Karbi
Anglong Autonomous Council (KAAC), and legally protected under an appropriate
law to prevent encroachment and developmental activities detrimental to animal
movement.
506 507
7.13
Kaziranga – Karbi Anglong at Panbari
This corridor connects the elephant habitats of Kaziranga National Park with
3D map showing the landscape of the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong at Panbari Corridor
the Karbi Anglong Forest Division through Panbari Reserve Forest. The corridor
is disconnected due to agricultural land for about 500 m between NH 37 and
Kaziranga National Park. Elephants move from Kaziranga to the Karbi Anglong Hills
through agricultural fields and cross the busy NH 37 between Methoni Tea Estate
and Panbari forest quarters to enter Panbari Reserve Forest and Karbi Anglong.
Alternate name Panbari

State Assam
Connectivity Kaziranga National Park with Karbi
Anglong Forest
93° 29’ 36”- 93° 30’ 8” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Revenue Land (3rd

Addition to Kaziranga National Park)
Major land use Agriculture and forest
Major habitation/settlements Temporary houses of Siljuri-Kakojuri
and Methoni villages
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; more during cropping season
(October to December)
Corridor habitat status: There are no forest patches in the corridor area between
Kaziranga and NH 37 except Panbari Reserve Forest on the southern side of NH
37. A major part of the corridor is agriculture land. Panbari Reserve Forest has
508 509
about 112 species of plants of which 65 are tree species, dominated by Shorea
robusta, Duabanga grandiflora, Tectona grandis, Gmelina arborea, Lagerstroemia
myriocarpa, Diptereocarpus macrocarpus, Erythrina indica, Terminalia myriocarpa,
Phyllantus emblica, Sterospermum chelonoides, Syzygium cumini, Michelia champaca,
Bauhinia variegata, Pterospermum acerifolium etc. The shrub and herb species
include Laportea crenulata, Debregeasia wallichiana, Lasia spinosa, Justicia adhatoda,
Sagittarias agittifolia, Alpinia allughas etc. Ground vegetation is dominated by
grasses and shrubs.

Karbi Anglong Forest: 614
Map of the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong at Panbari Corridor

Forest/Land use
Agriculture: Seasonal paddy
Highway: NH 37 (Guwahati-Jorhat)
Artefacts: High-voltage power line
Settlements: About 20 temporary houses of Siljuri-Kakojuri village

Mountain Range: Karbi Plateau (Mikir Hills)
River: Brahmaputra
Protected Area: Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve
IBA: Kaziranga National Park (IBA category A1, A2, A4i, A4iii)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Heavy traffic on National Highway 37 passing through the corridor has
510 511
severely affected elephant movement. On average, 229.5 vehicles per hour ply on CONSERVATION PLAN
the highway; an average of 5500 vehicles per day, increasing to over 6000 vehicles
on weekends. The movement of heavy and six-wheel vehicles is comparatively 1. The corridor should be legally protected under an appropriate law to prevent
higher than that of four-wheelers. This is due to the movement of goods vehicles encroachment and developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
and buses.
2. All the temporary houses on agricultural land within the corridor need to be
2. Agricultural land between the boundary of Kaziranga National Park and National vacated following consultations with villagers.
Highway 37 covers about 72.5 hectares, of which about 57.5 hectares is under the
control of villagers. 3. An overpass should be constructed in the corridor area for vehicles plying on
NH 37. Till then, traffic on the road should be regulated with suitable barriers
3. Illegal extraction and felling of trees in Panbari Reserve Forest. between 6 pm and 6 am.
4. New houses (about 20 temporary houses) have been established by villagers 4. The stone quarry on the Karbi Anglong side of the corridor should be shut down
from Siljuri-Kakojuri in the agricultural land of the corridor. immediately. Protection to Panbari Reserve Forest and the adjoining forest areas
of Karbi Anglong should be strengthened.
5. A stone quarry lies on the Karbi Anglong side of the corridor (behind Panbari
Reserve Forest). Land identified to secure the corridor: The total area of the corridor is about 72.5
hectares, of which about 15 hectares have been acquired by the government and
Corridor villages: Earlier only two or three temporary houses were found in the are now part of the 3rd Addition to Kaziranga National Park. About 4.4 hectares
corridor area. Now about 20 temporary houses have been established inside the were secured by the Bokakhat Revenue Department, Kaziranga National Park and
corridor, essentially by settlers from Siljuri-Kakojuri village to show their presence Wildlife Trust of India in 2009-10. In consultation with villagers, the remaining 53.1
on their land and complicate its acquisition by the government. The southern side hectares under the possession of people from Methoni Tea Estate and Siljuri-
of the corridor has a few staff quarters of the Panbari Beat, as well as Kakajuri Kakojuri village need to be secured.
village which is inhabited by Karbi people.
Corridor dependent villages: Kakojuri Karbi Gaon towards the south, Siljuri village
towards the west, Methoni village towards the east.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Only a few instances of property damage and human

deaths caused by elephants have been reported in and around the corridor. Crop
damage by elephants in this corridor village is moderate and occurs during the
elephant migratory season.
512 513
7.14
Kaziranga – Karbi Anglong at
Kanchanjuri
3D map showing the landscape of the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong at Kanchanjuri Corridor
This corridor connects the elephant habitats of Kaziranga National Park with
Ruthepahar forest of East Karbi Anglong Division (towards the northeast) and
Bagser Reserve Forest of Nagaon Forest Division (to the southwest). The corridor
passes through Burapahar Tea Garden, a rubber plantation and settlements on
the southern side of National Highway 37. A part of Burapahar Tea Garden has
been declared as the 4th Addition to Kaziranga National Park.
Alternate name Kanchanjuri

State Assam
Connectivity Kaziranga National Park with East Karbi
Anglong Forest Division and Nagaon
Forest Division
Length and Width 0.9 – 2.6 km and 3 km
93° 9’ 30”- 93° 11’ 7” E

Major land use Forest, Tea plantation and settlement
Major habitation/settlements Kanchanjuri, Mandu Bey, Govingaon,
Enjaigaon and Paschim Deopani
Corridor habitat status: Almost half of the corridor is located in the Burapahar
Tea Garden area and the remainder in Bagser Reserve forest. The corridor forest
has about 70 species of plants, of which 70% are tree species.
514 515
The important species include Shorea robusta, Tectona grandis, Gmelina

arborea, Lagerstroemia myriocarpa, Diptereocarpus macrocarpus, Cassia fistula,
Terminalia myriocarpa, Phyllantus emblica, Michelia champaca, Bauhinia variegata,
Pterospermum acerifolium, Spondia spinnata, Toon ciliate etc.

Map of the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong at Kanchanjuri Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical moist deciduous
Settlements: Kanchanjuri, Enjaigaon, Thenkurgaon, Mandu Bey, Govingaon and
Paschim Deopani
Plantations: Burapahar Tea Garden, smaller tea gardens, Karbi Anglong
Autonomous Council rubber plantation
Buildings and Artefacts: Resorts and dhabas

Mountain Range: Karbi Plateau
River: Brahmaputra
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Heavy traffic on National Highway 37 passing through the corridor: On average,
of 207.6 vehicles per hour ply through the corridor stretch, a majority of them
516 517
being four-wheel (105.8 vehicles per hour) and six-wheel (58.5 vehicles per hour) be prevented to facilitate elephant movement, by working closely with the tea
vehicles. The movement of heavy vehicles and six-wheel vehicles is comparatively garden’s management.
higher than that of four-wheelers on this highway. The expansion of the highway
will add to the traffic volume and speed, making animal movement difficult. 3. Vehicular traffic at night on NH 37, especially during the monsoon floods, needs
to be regulated. Speed breakers are needed to control vehicular speed. Widening
2. Barbed-wire fencing along the road in Burapahar Tea Garden and a few other of the highway within the corridor area should be stopped.
small tea gardens in the corridor area.
4. The collection of minor forest produce, timber and fuelwood from the corridor
3. Human settlements (six villages) on the western side of Burapahar Tea Garden and Karbi Anglong forests needs to be controlled and regulated.
are in the corridor area. The expansion of these settlements is increasing biotic
pressure. The collection of fuelwood from Bagser Reserve Forest has deteriorated 5. Setting up of new resorts in the corridor areas need to be prevented and the
the corridor forest. activities of existing resorts regulated.
4. Agricultural land and rubber plantation. Secured Corridor Land

1. Part of Burapahar Tea Garden (89.75 ha) has been included as the 4th Addition
5. Resorts and dhabas are coming up in and around the corridor. to Kaziranga National Park (vide letter No.FRS. 104/85/41). Habitat restoration
needs to be undertaken here.
Corridor dependent villages: Kanchanjuri (70 households), Enjaigaon (25
households), Thenkurgaon (68 households) , Mandu Bey (76 households), 2. It is important that land use change in remaining part of the tea garden is
Govingaon (60 households) and Paschim Deopani (80 households). All are prevented.
revenue villages.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Elephant movement is reported throughout the year

and increases from October to December. No human or elephant deaths have
been reported due to conflict in the corridor area in the last five years. However,
instances of crop damage by elephants are reported on the agricultural land in
the settlements.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be legally protected under an appropriate law to prevent

2. Land use change in the remaining part of Burapahar Tea Garden needs to
518 519
7.15
Kaziranga – Karbi Anglong at
Haldibari
3D map showing the landscape of the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong at Haldibari Corridor
This corridor connects the elephant habitats of Kaziranga National Park in the
north with North Karbi Anglong Wildlife Sanctuary and the adjoining community
forests of the Karbi Anglong Hills in the south. National Highway 37 passes through
both the habitats in the corridor. The corridor starts from the end of Hathikuli Tea
Estate (2nd Addition of Kaziranga National Park) in the northeast and extends till
the 5th Addition of Kaziranga National Park in the west.
Alternate name Haldibari

State Assam
Connectivity Kaziranga National Park with North
Karbi Anglong Wildlife Sanctuary
93° 19’ 33”- 93° 20’ 44” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and Protected Area

Major land use Forest and a few settlements towards
the Karbi Anglong Hills on the fringe
Frequency of usage by elephants Occasional; June to August
Corridor habitat status: The corridor has good habitat on both sides of NH
37. Prominent plant species include Shorea robusta, Tectona grandis, Bauhinia
520 521
variegata, Bauhinia purpurea, Cassia fistula, Diptereocarpus macrocarpus, Duabanga

grandiflora, Delonix regia, Erythrin aindica, Ficus lapidosa, Gmelina arborea, Garcinia
pendiculata, Lagerstroemia myriocarpa, Litsea monopetala, Phyllantus emblica,
Michelia champaca, Terminalia myriocarpa, Pterospermum acerifolium, Spondia
spinnata, Sterospermum chelonoides, Toon ciliate etc. Bamboo species in the
corridor forest are Bambusa pallid, Dendrocalamus giganteus and Bambusa tulda.

Map of the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong at Haldibari Corridor

Forest/Land use

River: Brahmaputra
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
207.6 vehicles per hour ply through the corridor stretch, a majority of them
being four-wheel (105.8 vehicles per hour) and six-wheel (58.5 vehicles per hour)
vehicles. The movement of heavy vehicles and six-wheel vehicles is comparatively
higher than that of four-wheelers on this highway. The expansion of the highway
will add to the traffic volume and speed, making animal movement difficult.
522 523
2. The eastern part of the corridor has settlements of Hathikuli Tea Estate and of the highway within the corridor area should be stopped. An overpass could be
Chingthong Togbi village at the foothills of Karbi Anglong. A few other villages constructed in the corridor area for vehicle movement.
are also located at the foothills. Biotic pressure in terms of fuelwood and NTFP
collection has impacted the forest. 3. The expansion of activities around the Burhi Mai Temple has to be stopped and
the temple area strictly demarcated. No other activities should be allowed along
3. Burhi Mai Temple in the middle of the corridor: Although this is a small temple, the road near the temple and existing structures should be removed.
several small structures, shops and commercial activities have mushroomed in
and around the corridor because of it, affecting elephant movement. Further
expansion will add to the problem.
4. Hotels and resorts have come up on both the western and eastern parts of the
corridor. This could further affect the habitat and elephant movement.
Corridor dependent villages: Hathikuli Tea Estate, Chingthong Togbi (72

households), Hemai Rangpi (27-28 households), Sarmen Sygner (65-68
households), Haliram Engleng (60 households), Kamchan Rangi (18-20 households)
and Basim Sygner (18-20 households).
The corridor does not have any settlement within its area. However, on its eastern
side on the foothills of Karbi Anglong, lie the staff quarters of Hathikhuli Tea Estate,
as well as Chingthong Togbi, Hemai Rangpi, Sarmen Sygner, Haliram Engleng,
Kamchan Rangi and Basim Sygner settlements.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be legally protected under an appropriate law to prevent

The entire corridor are should be declared as a ‘No Development Zone’ and its
land use monitored. Fig. 7.12: NH 37 passing through the Haldibari Corridor
2. Vehicular traffic at night on NH 37, especially during the monsoon floods, needs
to be regulated. Speed breakers are needed to control vehicular speed. Widening
524 525
7.16
Kaziranga – East Karbi Anglong at
Deosur
3D map showing the landscape of the Kaziranga - East Karbi Anglong at Deosur Corridor
This corridor connects the Porcupa Range of East Karbi Anglong Forest Division
with the Burapahar Range of Kaziranga National Park. Elephants move from the
Karbi Anglong Hills to Kaziranga through encroached agriculture land between
the Burapahar No.2 and Deosur villages located along NH 37, which the forest
department has recently evicted and cleared for the free movement of elephants.
Alternate name Deosur

State Assam
Connectivity Kaziranga National Park with East
Karbi Anglong Forest Division
Length and Width Length 0.8 km and Width 1.6 km
93° 7’ 6”- 93° 8’ 52” E

Major land use Forest and agriculture
especially during floods
Corridor habitat status: The corridor consists of agricultural land and the forests
of East Karbi Anglong Forest Division. The main plant species present in the forest
include Shorea robusta, Tectona grandis, Diptereocarpus macrocarpus, Cassia fistula,
Terminalia myriocarpa, Phyllantus emblica, Michelia champaca, Bauhinia variegata,
Pterospermum acerifolium, Gmelina arborea etc.
526 527

Forest/Land use
Settlements: Burapahar Tea Estate colony, Deosur Rongpi Gaon and Deosur Gaon
(adjacent to the corridor)
Agriculture: Seasonal paddy (encroachment on government land)
Map of the Kaziranga - East Karbi Anglong at Deosur Corridor

Buildings and Artefacts: Electric sub-station

River: Brahmaputra
Elephant Reserve Name: Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Encroachment between Burapahar No.2 and Deosur villages and a part of
Bagser Reserve Forest had completely impaired the structural connectivity of
elephant habitats between Kaziranga National Park and the Karbi Anglong hills.
This encroachment has recently been cleared by the forest department but needs
to be periodically monitored.

207.6 vehicles per hour ply through the corridor stretch, a majority of them
528 529
being four-wheel (105.8 vehicles per hour) and six-wheel (58.5 vehicles per hour)
vehicles. The movement of heavy vehicles and six-wheel vehicles is comparatively
higher than that of four-wheelers on this highway. The expansion of this highway
will add to the traffic volume and speed, making animal movement difficult.
Fig. 7.13: Elephants crossing the highway through the the Kaziranga - East Karbi Anglong Corridor at Deosur
3. Biotic pressure from the fringe villages of Burapahar Tea Estate, Deosur Rongpi
Gaon and Deosur has affected the quality of the habitat. Shops and illegal hamlets
have come up in the last one decade.
Corridor dependent villages: There is no settlement located inside the corridor.

Corridor dependent villages include the Burapahar Tea Estate colony (80
households), Deosur Rongpi Gaon and Deosur (106 households).
CONSERVATION PLAN
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent agricultural activities
on government land, encroachment of forest land, illicit felling, slash and burn
agriculture, and developmental activities detrimental to the corridor.
2. The expansion of human settlements, shops and hotels along NH 37 needs to

be prevented.
3. Restoration of the degraded Bagser Reserve Forest should be undertaken on

a priority basis.
530 531
7.17
Kukurakata – Bagser at Amguri
This corridor connects the Kukurakata Reserve Forest of Kaziranga National

Park with Bagser Reserve Forest of Nagaon Forest Division and the forests of
3D map showing the landscape of the Kukurakata - Bagser at Amguri Corridor

Karbi Anglong. Elephants pass through the tea gardens, settlements and forest
patches between Amguri Chang and Kalapani Timung villages. This movement
has drastically reduced due to the presence of a large number of settlements,
restaurants and hotels near NH 37.
State Assam
Connectivity Kaziranga National Park with Karbi
Anglong Forest Division
Length and Width 0.5-2 km and 2 km
93° 2’ 7”- 93° 4’ 37” E
Legal status Private Land, Reserve Forest and land

Major land use Agriculture, tea garden, settlement
and forest
Major habitation/settlements Amguri Chang, Natundenga, Kalapani
Timung Gaon
Forest type Tropical semi evergreen forest and
grassland
Frequency of usage by elephants Low
Corridor habitat status: Most of the corridor area is under paddy cultivation or
occupied by human settlements.
532 533

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical semi evergreen forest and grassland
Settlements: Amguri Chang, Natundenga, Kalapani Timung Gaon
Plantation: Tea and rubber
Map of the Kukurakata - Bagser at Amguri Corridor

River: Brahmaputra
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Heavy traffic on National Highway 37 passing through the corridor. More than
5000 vehicles ply per day on this highway. The expansion of NH 37 will increase
traffic volume and speed, further hindering animal movement.
2. Tea gardens and the expansion of Kalapani Timung Gaon, Amguri Chang and
Natundenga villages in and around the corridor area, and the resulting biotic
pressure (fuelwood and timber collection), has affected elephant movement.
3. Collection of fuelwood from Bagser Reserve Forest and Kukurakata Reserve

Forest has severely degraded the habitat.
534 535
4. Expansion of agricultural land in the corridor area.
5. Restaurants, resorts and an amusement park located along NH 37 in and around

the corridor have hindered animal movement, with vehicles halting at these places.
Corridor villages: The corridor has three revenue villages being used for
settlement and agriculture under the jurisdiction of Kaliabor subdivision of
Nagaon district: Amguri Chang (96 households), Natundenga (65 households) and
Kalapani Timung Gaon (38 households). Chikoni Tea Garden lies on the south side
of the corridor.
Human-Elephant Conflict: No mortality of humans or elephants has been
Fig. 7.14: A view of Amguri village inside the corridor

reported due to conflict in the last five years, though one person was injured by
an elephant in August 2013. Crop damage increases during the paddy season
from October to December.
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. New restaurants/resorts in the corridor area need to be prohibited. The

activities of existing establishments should be regulated. The corridor area needs
strict monitoring to prevent land use change affecting elephant movement.
3. Vehicular traffic at night on NH 37, especially during the monsoon floods, needs
to be regulated by maintaining a time card system. Speed breakers are needed to
control vehicular speed. Widening of the highway within the corridor area should
be stopped.
536 537
7.18
Bornadi - Khalingduar
This corridor connects Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary with Khalingduar Reserve

Forest. The corridor is located on the international border of India and Bhutan in
the north of Udalguri district. Elephants move from Khalingduar Reserve Forest
3D map showing the landscape of the Bornadi-Khalingduar Corridor

of Dhansiri Forest Division to Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary and Daranga Reserve
Forest, through the foothills of undulating mountains, the Neoli Proposed Reserve
Forest (PRF), tea gardens and human habitations.
Alternate name Neoli

State Assam
Connectivity Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary and
Dhansiri Forest Division
Bornadi WLS – Khalingduar RF
Length and Width 8 km and 0.9–1.5 km
91° 45’ 37”- 91° 50’ 46” E
Legal status Private Lands, Reserve Forest

Major land use Agriculture land, human habitation
and tea garden
Major habitation/settlements Tankibasti and Samrang
Forest type Semi evergreen and mixed dry
deciduous
Corridor habitat status: The forest in the corridor area has suffered massive
deforestation between 1991and 2001 and is quite degraded. The grassland is
getting converted into mixed dry deciduous forest in many parts.
538 539
Plant species recorded in the area include Dillenia pentagyna, Bombax ceiba,
Terminalia chebula, Holarrhenaanti dysenterica, Hydnocarpus kurzii, Sterculia villosa,
Bridellia stipularis, Gmelina arborea, Phyllanthus emblica, Randia spinosa, Malotus
philippinensis and Butea menosperma. Weeds (Mikenia macrantha, Lantana camara,
Ageratum conyzoides, Eupatorium odoratum, Leeacrispa, and Mimosa invisa) have
taken over large areas of the corridor forest.

Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary:102
Khalingduar Reserve Forest: 50
Daranga Reserve Forest – Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary – Khalingduar Reserve Forest
complex: 150 - 200
Map of the Bornadi - Khalingduar Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Semi evergreen and mixed dry deciduous
Settlements: Tankibasti, Samrang
Agriculture: Paddy, areca nut
Tea Estates: large numbers
Highway: Mungaldoi-Bhutiachang

Elephant Reserve: Ripu-Chirang Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Bornadi WLS, Manas Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Encroachment in the Neoli Proposed Reserve Forest as well as in Bornadi
Wildlife Sanctuary and Khalingduar Reserve Forest for tea plantation, agriculture
and settlements threatens the future structural connectivity as well as quality of
forest in the corridor and the habitats being connected.
540 541
2. Expansion of settlements and agricultural practices in and around the area from and 2014. During the same period, 28 elephants were also killed due to conflict.
Neoli Proposed Reserve Forest till Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary has disconnected Many houses are damaged and a large extent of crop is destroyed every year by
the structural connectivity of the corridor. elephants.
3. Deforestation and biotic pressure exerted by the villages of Tankibasti and

Samrang has severely degraded the corridor habitat. A large area is infested with CONSERVATION PLAN
weeds, affecting the quality of the forest and consequently the availability of food
for animals.
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent agricultural activities
on the goverment land, encroachment of forest land, illicit felling of trees and
4. Grazing of thousands of domestic cattle inside the Neoli Proposed Reserve Forest
developmental activities detrimental to the corridor.
and surrounding habitats poses a severe threat to the quality of the corridor
forest and disturbs the free movement of elephants.
2. Expansion of human settlements and agriculture in Tankibasti and Samrang
villages must be prevented.
5. Expansion of agriculture, apart from the large number of tea gardens and
settlements, is affecting the free movement of elephants and has severely
3. The encroachment of corridor forest and habitat has to be prevented; the
increased human-elephant conflict in this region.
eviction of existing encroachments from critical parts of the corridor and
surrounding habitat should be taken up on a priority basis.
6. A Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) camp is located in the corridor area and hinders the
movement of elephants.
4. Habitat restoration has to be undertaken in the entire corridor forest in Neoli
Proposed Reserve Forest as well as the habitats of Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuary and
Corridor villages: Bodo, Nepali and Adivasi tribes are the major communities
Khalingduar Reserve Forest. Illegal extraction of bamboo and NTFP needs to be
living in the corridor villages. Most are daily wage labourers, though they earn a
regulated.
secondary income from paddy cultivation and cattle rearing. They depend on the
corridor forest for fodder and NTFP collection, and bamboo extraction.
5. The SSB camp should be shifted outside the corridor.
Tankibasti, Samrang and few encroached settlements lie within the corridor.
6. Neoli Proposed Reserve Forest needs to be declared as a Reserve Forest at the
earliest.
Corridor dependent villages: Nonaipara Basti and other encroached villages.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is very high in the Bornadi-Khalingduar corridor

landscape and is a major threat to the conservation of elephants. More than 50
people lost their lives due to elephants in the Udalguri district between 2003
542 543
7.19
Ranggira – Nokrek
Elephants from Ranggira, Sanchangiri and Galwang Reserve Forest area use
this corridor to move to Nokrek National Park. Earlier, they moved via Bismagre,
Bibragre, Sakalgre and Mandalgre private forests. However, the establishment
3D map showing the landscape of the Ranggira – Nokrek Corridor

of human settlements, construction of the North-Eastern Hill University (NEHU)
campus, the Garo Students Union building, a fishery pond, the 2nd Police Battalion
campus and other artefacts along the Tura-Rongram road have almost blocked
the corridor. At times the elephants move north of the NEHU Campus (near the
boys hostel) and cross the road close to the Garo Students Union building.
State Meghalaya
Connectivity West Garo Hills with Nokrek National
Park
Length and Width 7-8 km and 0.1 – 1.5 km
90° 12’ 3”-90° 15’ 10” E
Legal status Aking Land and Private Land

Major land use Forest, plantation, settlement,
agriculture and NEHU campus
Major habitation/settlements Chasingre, Phagugre, Chibragre, Ganol
Sangma, 2nd Police Battalion campus
and Boldorenggre
Forest type Tropical evergreen and moist
deciduous with jhum patches
Corridor habitat status: The corridor consists of tropical evergreen forest along
544 545
the southern boundary of Nokrek National Park and Ranggira Reserve Forest. The
terrain is highly undulating.

This region has about 40-50 elephants.
Forest/Land use
Legal Status: Community Land and land under NEHU campus
Agriculture: Slash and burn cultivation
Settlements: Chibragre village, Ganolapal and Garo Student Union building
Aloe vera processing factory (Ganol Songma) and fishery pond
Highway: Tura-Guwahati (NH 51)
Map of the Ranggira – Nokrek Corridor

Elephant Reserve Name: Garo Hills Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Nokrek National Park and Biosphere Reserve
IBA: Nokrek National Park
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats:
1. The NEHU campus that has come up in the middle of the corridor has drastically
affected the movement of elephants and other wildlife.
2. The Garo Students Union building located on other side of the road (opposite the
NEHU campus) has also hindered elephant movement.
3. Human settlements are coming up around the NEHU campus and along the road
in and around the corridor area.
4. Community land on the other side of the road towards Nokrek is also a threat.
Several pieces of land have been purchased for business and other use.
546 547
Corridor villages: Chibragre and its community land towards Nokrek and
Ganolapal (new settlements that have come next to the NEHU campus on the
other side of the road). Aloe vera processing factory (Ganol Songma).
Corridor dependent Villages: Settlements and community land of Duragre.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Fig. 7.15: NEHU Tura campus within the corridor area hindering elephant movement
1. Declaration, demarcation and legal protection of the corridor under various
laws appropriate for the state.
2. Negotiation with NEHU authorities to spare about 44 hectares of land near the
hostel area for elephant movement.
3. Relocate the Garo Students Union building to an alternate site outside the
corridor.
4. Prevent the establishment of new settlements in the corridor area.
5. State forest department and Garo Hills Autonomous District Council to secure
land on other side of road (opposite the NEHU Campus) to provide 500 m width
to the corridor.
548 549
7.20
Nokrek – Imangre
The Nokrek-Imangre corridor connects a large stretch of forest in and around

Imangre Reserve Forest with Nokrek National Park and areas adjacent to it. Being
inaccessible by road and due to the comparatively low human density in the area,
the corridor is safe. However, the mining and transportation of coal and limestone
3D map showing the landscape of Nokrek – Imangre Corridor

are potential threats to the area.
State Meghalaya
Connectivity Imangre Reserve Forest and Nokrek
National Park
90° 30’ 49”- 90° 34’ 26” E
Legal status Community Land (Aking Land)

Major land use Forest, settlement and jhum cultivation
Major habitation/settlements Rongma Rekmangre, Dobagre,
Gopgre, Enan Rompagre and Papa
Asakgre
Forest type Tropical evergreen and moist
deciduous patches
Corridor habitat status: The corridor consists of tropical evergreen forest along
the southern boundary of Nokrek National Park and moist deciduous forest with
patches of degraded secondary forest in and around Imangre Reserve Forest. The
terrain is highly undulating. Plant species present in the area include Macaranga
550 551
denticulata, Dillenia indica, Dillenia pentagyna, Diospyros toposia, Lagerstroemia

parviflora, Duabanga grandiflora, Erythrina stricta, Grewia nervosa, Schima wallichii,
Sterculia villosa, Trewia nudiflora, Dioscorea hispida, Heliotropium indicum, Litsea
polyantha, Eugenia claviflora etc.

Rewak Reserve Forest, Imangre Reserve Forest and adjacent areas of Nokrek
National Park: 390-400
(Elephant Census Meghalaya, 2008)
Map of Nokrek – Imangre Corridor showing the land to be declared as VRF

Forest/Land use
Legal status: Community land and Community Reserve
Forest type: Tropical evergreen and moist deciduous
Settlements: Dobagre, Rongma Rekmangre, Gopgre, Eman Rompagre and Papa
Asakgre
Agriculture: Slash and burn cultivation

Elephant Reserve: Garo Hills Elephant Reserve
Nearest Protected Area: Siju Wildlife Sanctuary, Nokrek National Park and Biosphere
Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Coal and limestone mining and associated roads opening up in the habitat are a
threat to elephant movement.
2. Biotic pressure on the corridor from fringe villages, especially due to slash and
burn cultivation and the Kharukhol-Chokpot mining road.
Corridor villages
Dobagre, Rongma Rekmangre, Gopgre, and Eman Rompagre and Papa Asakgre
552 553
Corridor dependent Villages

Papa Asakgre (29 families), Papa Songmong (34 families), Enan Rompagre, Agalgre
(15 families) Doabgre (90 families), and Rongma Rekmangre (27 families).
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. To secure the corridor, three Community Reserves have been notified by the
state forest department in collaboration with the local community. These are
Rongma Rekmangre (about 90 ha), Rongma Pharungre (173 ha) and Eman Asakgre
(37-38 ha). In consultation with the villagers, the remaining part of the community
forest located inside the corridor (near the streams) needs to be declared as a
Village Reserve Forest or Community Reserve.
2. Prevent large-scale coal and limestone mining in fringe areas and have mining
regulated by the District Council.
3. Provide eco-development support to the villagers to reduce their dependence

on the corridor forest, especially for fuelwood collection.
Fig. 7.16: A Western Hoolock Gibbon in the corridor
554 555
7.21
Rewak – Imangre
This corridor connects Rewak Reserve Forest with Imangre Reserve Forest and
passes through Aking (clan) lands and the Jadegindam settlement. There is no
immediate threat to the corridor except human settlements and jhumming.
3D map showing the landscape of the Rewak – Imangre Corridor

State Meghalaya
Connectivity Imangre Reserve Forest with Rewak
Reserve Forest
Length and Width 6.5 – 8.4 km and 1.7 – 2.8 km
90° 34’ 31”- 90° 39’ 25” E

Major land use Forest, settlement and shifting
cultivation
Major habitation/settlements Jadegindam
Corridor habitat status: Major species reported from the corridor forest include
Lagerstroemia parviflora, Duabanga grandiflora, Macaranga denticulata, Dillenia
indica, Dillenia pentagyna, Diospyros toposia, Ficus racemosa, Erythrina stricta,
Grewia nervosa, Schima wallichii, Sterculia villosa, Toona ciliata, Trewia nudiflora,
Dioscorea hispida, Heliotropium indicum, Litsea polyantha, Wrightia tomentosa,
Eugenia claviflora, Rhus succedanea etc.
556 557

Siju Wildlife Sanctuary, Rewak Reserve Forest: 273-280
Forest/Land use
Legal status of corridor forest: Aking land (clan land)
Forest type: Tropical evergreen forest
Agriculture: Slash and burn cultivation near Jadegindam village
Map of the Rewak – Imangre Corridor showing the lands to be declared as VRF
Settlement: Jadegindam

Nearest Protected Area: Siju Wildlife Sanctuary and Nokrek National Park
& Biosphere Reserve
Siju Cave
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. The corridor has been secured with the declaration of the Jadegindam Village
Reserve Forest but the pressures of jhum cultivation and expansion of habitations
could be a potential threat.
2. Biotic pressure exerted by the fringe villages of Imangre and Chibagre, and the
Nengkong Songonong settlement.
Corridor dependent villages: Imangre (57 families), Chibagre (55 families),

Nengkong Songonong (42 families).
Most of the villagers depend upon shifting cultivation for sustenance. They also
collect NTFP and other resources from the forest. A few villagers work in the
adjacent coal mines. Some have their own businesses. The only village in the
corridor is Jadegindam with about 18 families and a population of 93.
558 559
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is reported from the area, although there has
been no human casualty or injury. A vast majority (83.3%) of the households report
human-elephant conflict. May to July is the peak season for crop depredation by
elephants.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The vital part of the corridor has been notified as Jadegindam Village Reserve
Forest (417 ha) through the joint efforts of the Nokma (village head), Garo Hills
Autonomous District Council, forest department and Wildlife Trust of India. This
VRF should be monitored periodically for usage by elephants and to prevent biotic
pressures.
2. Eco-developmental and livelihood support should be provided to the villagers

to reduce their dependence on the corridor forest. Wildlife Trust of India is
working with the community to strengthen the livelihood prospects of people in
Fig. 7.17: Jadegindam VRF in the corridor
Jadegindam and reduce pressure on forest lands.
3. Prevent the expansion of settlements as well as jhumming in the corridor area.

Terrace cultivation could be taken up on a pilot basis as a substitute for slash and
burn cultivation.
Fig. 7.18: Microhabitat of the elephant corridor
560 561
7.22
Siju – Rewak
This narrow corridor connecting Siju Wildlife Sanctuary with Rewak Reserve
Forest is a very important passage for elephants and helps in maintaining
habitat continuity between Balpakram National Park, Siju Wildlife Sanctuary,
Rewak and Imangre Reserve Forests, and Nokrek National Park. Elephants cross
3D map showing the landscape of the Siju – Rewak Corridor

the Simsang River through the sandy stretches in the corridor near Siju Aretika
village. Elsewhere, the river is bound by steep limestone cliffs and large boulder
formations along both banks.
State Meghalaya
Connectivity Siju Wildlife Sanctuary with Rewak
Reserve Forest
90° 40’ 11”- 90° 41’ 3” E

Major land use Forest and settlement
Major habitation/settlements Siju Aretika
Forest type Tropical evergreen forest with
plantation
Corridor habitat status: The dominant species found is Shorea robusta. Other
species include Erythrina stricta, Lagerstroemia parviflora, Duabanga grandiflora,
Macaranga denticulata, Dillenia indica, Ficus racemosa, Ficus hispida, Grewia nervosa,
Streblusasper, Schima wallichii, Sterculia villosa, Toona ciliata, Dioscorea hispida,
Trewia nudiflora etc.
562 563

Balpakram National Park, Siju and Rewak Reserve Forests: 385-400
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical evergreen forest with areca nut plantation
Agriculture: Slash and burn cultivation (jhum)
Settlement: SijuAreitika
River: Simsang

Protected Area: Siju Wildlife Sanctuary and Balpakram National Park
Map of the Siju – Rewak Corridor

Siju Cave
IBA: Balpakram Complex (IBA criteria A1, A2, A4i)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Expansion of human settlements (26 families in Siju Aretika) and jhum cultivation
in Siju Ariteka, Rewak Kosigre and fringe villages.
2. Open cast mining for coal near the corridor and the consequent pollution of the
Simsang River.
3. Traffic: NH 62 passes through the corridor but is not a major problem. The
regular movement of heavy vehicles was, however, recorded throughout the day
and night due to coal mining in the area.
Corridor village: Siju Aretika
Corridor dependent villages: Siju Aretika (926 households), Rewak Kosi and
564 565
Kambepal (22 households) , Rewak Daburam (32 households), Rewak Songma (27 4. Prohibit destructive developmental activities in and around the Siju Wildlife
households) and Dakopgre (21 households). Sanctuary.
Six settlements are located in and around the corridor area, of which Siju Ariteka 5. Regulate coal mining around the corridor area.
is situated in the bottleneck of the corridor. Agriculture (jhum cultivation) and
areca nut plantation are the main livelihood sources, with paddy, ginger, maize,
water melon, brinjal, chilli etc being popular crops. Some of the villagers also work
as labourers in the nearby coal mines. They depend on the corridor forest for
cattle grazing, fuelwood collection and NTFP.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is high in this area. Four human deaths and
four cases of human injury were reported to have been caused by elephants
from 2008 to 2014. Damage to crops and property is also high in and around the
corridor area.
Working with local villagers, Wildlife Trust of India has power fenced the Siju Aretika
village to prevent conflict with elephants and other animals.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. To secure the corridor land, two Village Reserve Forests (VRFs) have been
notified in the corridor area by the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council in
collaboration with the Nokmas (village heads), forest department and Wildlife
Trust of India: Siju Aretika Village Reserve Forest (200 ha) and Rewak Kosigre
Village Reserve Forest (50 ha). These VRFs should be monitored periodically for
elephant usage and to prevent biotic pressures.
Fig. 7.19: A view of the Siju-Rewak Corridor
2. Explore the potential of declaring Rewak Reserve Forest as a Protected Area.
3. Undertake eco-developmental and livelihood support in the villages to reduce

the inhabitants’ dependence on the corridor forest.
566 567
7.23
Baghmara – Balpakram
This corridor connecting Balpakram National Park with Baghmara Reserve Forest
is vital in maintaining the continuity of about 600 sq km of elephant habitat.
Elephants generally pass through Halwa Atong (Gamseng Community Reserve
3D map showing the landscape of the Baghmara – Balpakram Corridor

Forest), Chitmang Gonggrot, Halwa Ambeng, Dambuk Atong, Halwa Bilda and
Ampangre Aking lands. Elephant movement has been hindered due to expanding
settlements, plantations, slash and burn (jhum) cultivation, and a school that has
come up in the movement path.
State Meghalaya
Connectivity Balpakram National Park with
Baghmara Reserve Forest
90° 41’ 34”-90° 46’ 12” E

Major land use Forest, plantation and agriculture
(jhum)
Major habitation/settlements Settlements
Forest type Tropical evergreen forest with
plantation and jhum land
Corridor habitat status: Plant species common in the corridor area include Dillenia
pentagyna, Dillenia indica, Callicarpa arborea, Tetrameles nudiflora, Lagerstroemia
parviflora, Crypteronia paniculata, Helicia nilagirica, Toona ciliata, Pterospermum
568 569
acerifolium, Schima wallichii, Gmelina arborea etc. Rubber plantations are also
present.

Balpakram National Park, Baghmara Reserve Forest and Siju WLS: 456
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical evergreen forest with plantation
Agriculture: Slash and burn (jhum) cultivation
Settlements: Halwa Atong, Chitmang Gonggrot, Dambuk Atong, Halwa Ambeng,
Halwa Bilda, Dambuk Jongkhol and Ampangre Aking
Map of the Baghmara – Balpakram Corridor

River: Simsang

Protected Area: Balpakram National Park
IBA: Balpakram Complex (IBA criteria A1, A2, A4i)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Destruction of natural forests for areca nut plantation has been occuring more
rapidly in recent years.
2. Expansion of villages in the corridor forest and jhum cultivation practices have
threatened elephant habitats.
3. Construction of a school has further constricted the corridor towards Baghmara

Reserve Forest.
4. The possible mining of a rich deposit of coal is a future threat.
570 571
Corridor Villages: Halwa Atong, Chitmang Gonggrot, Dambuk Atong, Halwa

Ambeng, Halwa Bilda, Dambuk Jongkhol and Ampangre Aking.
Corridor dependent villages: Dambuk Jongkhol (8 families), Panda, Bolbokgre and

Bolchokgiri.
Many villages are located in and around the corridor area. Of these, the settlements
of Halwa Atong (101 families, population 581), Chitmang Gonggrot (20 families,
population 113), Dambuk Atong (22 families, population 121), Halwa Ambeng (28
families, population 158), Halwa Bilda (39 families, population 219), and Ampangre
Fig. 7.20: View of the Baghmara-Balpakram Corridor

(70 families, population 385) are in the elephant movement path.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. Declare part of the corridor community forest as a Village Reserve Forest or

Community Reserve in consultation with villagers in Halwa Atong, Halwa Ambeng
and Halwa Bilda. A part of the corridor land in Ampangre village has been declared
as a Community Conservation Reserve.
2. Undertake eco-developmental activities and community support activities in

the villages to reduce dependency on the corridor forest. The livelihood and
eco-development support could be provided based on the villagers’ skill and
commitment towards protecting/improving the Community Reserve.
3. Prevent new constructions in the corridor areas.
4. Regulate plantation and cultivation in the corridor area.
572 573
08 THE SOUTHERNMOST ELEPHANT POPULATIONS OF INDIA

range over the two principal mountain chains of southern
India (the Western Ghats and a part of the Eastern Ghats)
Elephant corridors of in the states of Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra
Pradesh. The elephant habitats in this range, which lie
Southern India between 8°15’ and 15°30’ N and between 74°15’ and
K Ramkumar, Surendra Varma, P S Easa, Arun 78°00’ E, are diverse and include tropical evergreen,
Venkataraman, B Ramakrishnan, Sandeep Kr Tiwari, semi evergreen, moist deciduous, dry deciduous and
Vivek Menon and R Sukumar dry thorn forests, as well as grasslands and monoculture
plantations. Elephants inhabit an area ranging in elevation
between 100 msl* and 2000 msl. There are about eight
populations within this range based on contiguity of
habitats.
Northern Karnataka has about 40–60 elephants isolated

from the other populations of the Western Ghats. These
elephants are present in the Uttara Kannada and Belgaum
districts of the state, inhabiting dry and moist deciduous
forests. The elephants inhabiting the crestline of Karnataka
are highly scattered and are distributed in the evergreen
forests and montane grasslands of Dakshin Kannada,
Mangalore, Shimoga and Chikkamagalur districts. This
population only has about 60 elephants in small isolated
groups. The natural habitats in this region are fragmented
by the increasing human population, iron and manganese
ore mining, and hydro-electric projects. The Dandeli Tiger
Reserve alone supports the bulk of the elephants of this
region. No detailed data is available for the elephants in
Uttara Kannada, including in new habitats in Maharashtra
and Goa. A more objective study is needed to evaluate
habitat conditions, corridors, population structure and
* mean sea-level
<< Elephant in the
Periya at Pakranthalam
Corridor
© SANDEEP KR TIWARI / WTI
1 575
viability, including the present scenario of human-elephant conflict, to make firm rarely move along the plateaus from Coorg to Malnad or vice versa using the
conservation recommendations for this population (Baskaran, 2013). As of now no isolated forest patches available between the coffee plantations and cultivations/
elephant corridor is found in this landscape. settlements. However, the forest habitats in Malnad Plateau (Chikkamagalur
Forest Division), with a tenuous link to the crestline of Karnataka, are connected
The moist deciduous forest cover of Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary is the major elephant with the Mysore Plateau. Although it is not known whether any elephant herds
habitat that lies on the Malnad plateau on the eastern flanks of the Western or bulls from the Malnad Plateau range up to the Mysore Plateau or vice versa,
Ghats. The largest single population of elephants in Asia occupies areas south of the movement of elephants to the crestline from the Mysore (via Brahmagiri-
this region, extending from the Brahmagiri Hills to the Eastern Ghats, comprising Pushpagiri) and Malnad Plateaus (via Chikkamagalur Forest Division) is known to
the Nilgiri Hills of Tamil Nadu, the Bandipur-Nagarahole Protected Area complex take place and hence the population is not isolated (Varma, 2003).
of Karnataka, Wayanad in Kerala, and the Biligiri Ranganswamy Temple, Malai
Madeshwara and Kavery Protected Area complex of Karnataka, Sathyamangalam The construction of a series of hydro-electric projects (Pykara), especially on the
Tiger Reserve, Dharmapuri Forest Division, Hosur Forest Division, Cauvery North eastern side of Mudumalai, brought with them a large influx of human population
Wildlife Sanctuary in Tamil Nadu, and Bannerghatta National Park in Karnataka. and infrastructure development, which has created many bottlenecks threatening
the habitat contiguity with the Sigur Plateau that in turn connects with the Eastern
Census estimates reveal that the forested tracts in these parts of the Western Ghats. Similarly, there were proposals for infrastructure development plans to:
Ghats host 5900 elephants (Elephant Census 2010). In addition, the area being (i) create a highway from Kozhikode to Coimbatore by widening the existing road
contiguous with the Eastern Ghats, the actual population exceeds 8000 from Vazhaithottam to Sigur and linking it to Bhavanisagar to bypass the existing
elephants. Except Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary, the forest divisions on the north Ghats section highway that goes via the Nilgiris, and (ii) extend the Mysore-
of the Mysore plateau, such as those in Coorg and Malnad Plateaus (Virajpet, Chamarajanagar railway line to Coimbatore via Bhavanisagar-Sathyamangalam
Madikeri, Hassan, Chikkamagalur and Koppa), and those in the crestline region cutting across the Moyar valley, the connecting link between the Western and
(Mangalore, Brahmagiri, Pushpagiri, and Talacauveri), mostly with evergreen and Eastern Ghats (Baskaran, 2013). Land use change is one of the major issues for
semi evergreen habitats, have less than 0.5 elephants per sq km. The forests in the conservation of elephant corridors between the Western and Eastern Ghats.
the Mysore, Nilgiri, and southern parts of the Wayanad Plateau (Wayanad Wildlife About 16 land patches consisting of patta land, reserved land, revenue land, partly
Sanctuary), with tropical deciduous forests dominating, support the highest reserved land and encroached revenue land are needed to secure the elephant
density of elephants (mean 1.7 elephants per sq km, range: 1.5–2.5). Spread over corridors at Mudumalai and Sigur Plateau (Ramkumar and Arumugam, 2004).
2200 sq km, this region is estimated to have a mean population of 3700 elephants
(Elephant Census 2010) (Baskaran, 2013). Further south, the Coimbatore Forest Division has become one of the highest
human-elephant conflict areas in India due to constant human interference
The forest cover in the southern Malnad and Coorg Plateaus (forest divisions such by various LULC (Land Use Land Cover) changes in elephant migratory routes.
as Chikkamagalur, Hassan, Madikere territorial) has been exploited extensively The conversion to built-up from barren land and of barren to agriculture land
for commercial plantations (mainly coffee), forest-based industries (paper mills), in elephant migratory routes has been a major reason for the initiation and
and irrigation and hydro-electric projects (Prasad et al., 1974), resulting in higher increase of severe human-elephant conflict in the Coimbatore Forest Division
fragmentation of traditional elephant habitats along the plateaus. Therefore, the (Ramkumar, 2014).
forest contiguity between the Malnad and Coorg Plateaus is cut off and bulls can
576 577
The Brahmagiri-Nilgiri-Eastern Ghats landscape has diverse vegetation eastern Palani Hills, central Anaimalai Hills, and western Nelliampathi Hills – of
types with over 3300 sq km out of a total of about 12,600 sq km lying the Western Ghats.
within the Protected Area network. There are twenty elephant corridors
found in this landscape: 1) Karadikkal – Madeswara, 2) Tali – Bilikkal, The landscape also has diverse vegetation types with moist deciduous forest
3) Bilikkal – Javalagiri, 4) Edayarhalli – Guttiyalattur, 5) Edayarhalli – dominating the elephant habitats (Baskaran et al., 2007; Baskaran et al., 2013).
Doddasampige, 6) Chamrajanagar – Talamalai at Punjur, 7) Chamrajanagar This region is known for its rich biodiversity (Gadgil & Meher-Homji, 2003; CEPF
– Talamalai at Muddahalli, 8) Talamalai – Guttiyalattur, 9) Avarahalla – Sigur, 2007), however, the elephant habitat is under threat due to fragmentation by a
10) Kalhatti – Sigur at Glencorin, 11) Kaniyanpura – Moyar, 12) Moyar – Avarahalla, large number of hydro-electric projects (dams, open canals, penstock pipelines
13) Kalmalai – Singara and Avarahalla, 14) Periya at Pakranthalam, 15) Thirunelli and powerhouses), commercial plantations (tea, coffee, and cardamom), and
– Kudrakote, 16) Begur – Brahmagiri, 17) Kottiyur – Periya, 18) Jaccanaire Slope – settlement/cultivation along with the development of major roads (Sukumar, 1989;
Hulikal Durgam, 19) Anaikatti North – Anaikatti South, 20) Mudumalai – Nilambur Easa, et al., 1990; Baskaran et al., 2007; Baskaran et al., 2013).
via O’ Valley.
Due to greater habitat fragmentation in the Munnar Forest Division, its contiguity
Down south, the elephant population of the Nilambur, Silent Valley and Coimbatore to Theni Forest Division is presently cut off by non-forest commercial plantations.
belt is spread over 2300 sq km of habitat comprising diverse vegetation types However, elephants continue to move between these forest divisions through
ranging from evergreen forests to high altitude shola and grasslands. Two the commercial plantations (Baskaran et al., 2007; Baskaran et al., 2013). Human
elephant corridors are found in this landscape: 1) Nilambur Kovilakam – New settlements along with heavy road traffic between the southwestern part of
Amarambalam and 2) Nilambur at Appankappu. Munnar Division and the northeastern part of Kothamangalam Forest Division
act as barriers to elephant movement although forest contiguity exists between
Other than these large populations, two isolated herds also exist in this area. An these two areas. Therefore, the elephants ranging in Idukki and its adjoining
isolated herd of about 30 elephants inhabits the Kaundinya Wildlife Sanctuary in habitats in Kothamangalam and Kottayam Forest Divisions are isolated from the
the Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh and has originally migrated from the Hosur main population in the landscape. The large-scale conversion of natural habitats,
and Anekal Forest Divisions of Tamil Nadu. A small group of about six elephants especially on the eastern side of the landscape, has resulted in an increase in
is also reported from an isolated area in the Tirupattur Forest Division of Tamil human-elephant conflict. Five elephant corridors are located in this landscape:
Nadu. No elephant corridor is found in this landscape. 1) Anaimalai at Punachi, 2) Anaimalai at Waterfalls Estate 3) Anaimalai between
Siluvaimedu – Kadamparai, 4) Vazhachal – Anaimalai via Sholayar, and 5) Vazhachal
The Anaimalai-Parambikulam area is located to the south of the Palghat gap – Anaimalai via Ryan.
stretch of 5500 sq km and is home to about 2500 elephants. This area covers
18 forest divisions of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, including Protected Areas such as Contiguity between Mattupatti-Mathikettan Shola in the Munnar Division and the
the Anaimalai and Parambikulum Tiger Reserves, Chimmoni Wildlife Sanctuary, Theni Forest Division is presently cut off due to tea and cardamom plantations;
Peechi-Vazhani Wildlife Sanctuary, Thattekad Bird Sanctuary, Eravikulam further south the landscape has forest contiguity with the Periyar-Agasthyamalai
National Park and Chinnar Wildlife Sanctuary, in addition to the Palani Hills, landscape but elephant movement has stopped between the landscapes due to
Vazhachal, Nelliyampathi, Malayattur, Mankulam and Munnar areas. The the penstock pipe of the Periyar Hydroelectric Project, since its inception in 1959
population range topographically consists of three major hill ranges – the (Harikrishnan, 1972; Baskaran et al., 2006).
578 579
The Idukki Wildlife Sanctuary and adjacent areas of the Ayyappankoil and
Nagarampara Ranges and part of the Munnar and Kothamangalam Forest
Divisions have a small population of elephants (184; 2010 census) in an isolated
patch of forests of about 300 sq km, with a number of settlements within and
around the forests. No elephant corridors are found in this landscape.
The elephant population south of this is in the Periyar-Agasthyamalai landscape

located in the states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, and extends over 5600 sq km across
16 forest divisions. The elephant habitat in the landscape comprises the southern
part of the Periyar Plateau and its eastern spur, the Varushnad and Meghamalai
hill ranges, the Achankoil valley, and the Agasthyamalai and Mahendragiri hill
ranges on the southern side. Like any other landscape in the Western Ghats, the
Elephant corridors in Southern India - Part I (a)

eastern parts of the landscape with low rainfall have more tropical dry deciduous
and thorn forests, while the hill ridges and the western sides with high rainfall
have more tropical evergreen and moist deciduous forests. The landscape on
the northern side (Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Wildlife
Sanctuary, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife Sanctuaries) is probably the
most intact elephant range in southern India. However, the establishment of
human settlements and cultivation, and vehicular movement along the Senkotai-
Punalur highway, have cut off the habitat contiguity to a large extent between the
Agasthyamalai-Mahendragiri hill ranges and Periyar Plateau. Therefore, a small
number of elephants ranging in the Agasthyamalai-Mahendragiri hill ranges have
been isolated from the larger population found on the northern side (Baskaran,
2013). There is only one corridor found in this landscape: Srivilliputhur-Saptur at
Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary.
The Periyar-Agasthyamalai landscape is estimated to have 1800 elephants

(Elephant Census 2010). Of these about 300 are isolated on the southern side
in the Agasthyamalai and Mahendragiri hill ranges in the evergreen forests of
Thiruvananthapuram Forest Division, Neyyar, Shendurney and Peppara Wildlife
Sanctuaries, and Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve.
580 581
582
Elephant corridors in Southern India - Part I (b)

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
Elephant corridors in Southern India - Part 2

583
584
Elephant corridors in Southern India - Part 3

RIGHT OF PASSAGE
Fig. 8.01: Elephants at the Thirunelli - Kudrakote Corridor

585
8.01
Karadikkal – Madeshwara
This corridor connects Karadikkal State Forest and Madheshwara State Forest
of Bannerghatta National Park, Karnataka. Elephants move from Bannerghatta
to Hosur Forest Division in Tamil Nadu, further leading on to Cauvery Wildlife
3D map showing the landscape of the Karadikkal – Madeshwara Corridor

Sanctuary, Karnataka, through narrow forests between Jayapuradoddi and
Bilaganaguppa settlements.
Alternate name Ragihalli corridor

State Karnataka
Connectivity Karadikkal State Forest and
Madheshwara State Forest of
Bannerghatta National Park
77° 33’ 46”- 77° 34’ 49” E

Forest type Tropical thorn and deciduous forests
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; both herds and bulls
area of 0.3 ha. Of these, 14 were elephant food species. Acacia chundra, Anogeissus
latifolia and Lagerstroemia parviflora were the dominant species. Signs of lopping
were recorded in seven tree species, of which five were elephant food species.
The ground cover in 0.015 ha of corridor area was: grasses (35%), shrubs (25%),
herbs (20%) and barren ground (20%).
586 587

Bannerghatta National Park: 78 (77-89)
(Synchronised Elephant Population Estimation, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical thorn and deciduous
Road: Anekal-Harohalli State Highway
Buildings/Artefacts: Forest Checkpost near Jayapuradoddi
Map of the Karadikkal-Madeshwara corridor area showing the land to be secured

Mountain Range: Eastern Ghats
Elephant Range: Brahmagiri-Nilgiri-Eastern Ghats Landscape
Elephant Reserve: Mysore
Protected Area: Bannerghata National Park
IBA: Code. IN-KA-04, Criteria. A1, A2
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Development activities inside the Bannerghatta National Park by private land
owners at Kembadoddi, and stone quarries near the corridor area are threats to
the free movement of elephants.
2. Resorts: Resorts being developed on the southern boundary of the corridor at

Jayapuradoddi could encourage more resorts in this area in future, threatening
the corridor and elephant movement.
3. A proposed housing colony to the south of the corridor could be a threat to the
corridor.
4. Vehicle traffic: The Anekal-Harohalli State Highway and a mud road between
Jayapuradoddi and Bilaganaguppa intersect the corridor in the middle. An average
of 35 vehicles per hour ply on the state highway, with a peak of 72 vehicles
per hour from 10 am to 4 pm and 30 vehicles per hour from 6 pm to 12 am.
This is currently not a major threat to elephant movement.
5. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing as well as fuelwood and fodder collection in the
588 589
corridor and nearby forest degrades the habitat. About 400-500 cattle from protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and developmental
Kanuvemadhapura, 250-300 cattle from Jayapuradoddi and 70-80 cattle from activities detrimental to animal movement.
Beliganaguppa villages graze in the corridor and nearby forest areas.
2. A total of about 87 acres of land belonging to private estates could be secured
Corridor dependent villages: Kanuvemadhapura, Jayapuradoddi, Sivanahalli, to increase the width of the corridor from 510 m to 1000 m. This could be a buffer
Shivapura, Beliganaguppa and Urigendoddi. zone to prevent developmental activities along the corridor fringes, as well as to
prevent elephants from straying into Bilaganaguppa and Jayapuradoddi villages.
The villages of Jayapuradoddi and Bilaganeguppa, and the Kanuvemdhapura
settlement are situated near the corridor area. People from these villages 3. The villages of Kanuvemadhapura and Shivapura are also key for the conservation
depend on the corridor forest for fuelwood, fodder and cattle grazing.The of the Karadikkal-Madeswara elephant corridor. These villages are situated just
Karnataka Forest Department has erected AC charged fencing and a rubble wall outside the bottleneck of the corridor, within the natural habitat. More than 75
for Bilaganeguppa village. Elephant Proof Trenches (EPTs) have also been dug families live in these villages and the total extent of the area is 570 acres. Almost
by the forest department in some places. AC charged fencing and rubble walls all the inhabitants are ready to relocate due to severe human-elephant conflict.
were also provided to Jayapuradoddi and Kanuvemadhapura villages, but most They have voluntarily expressed their interest to the forest department to move
are non-functional due to a lack of maintenance and community participation. from their villages if suitable alternatives are available. In case if this is not possible,
People presently use traditional methods of night guarding using machans (tree they should be provided with suitable eco-development assistance and livelihood
platforms) and firecrackers to drive elephants away. support to reduce their dependence on the corridor forest.

Human-Elephant Conflict: The data on human deaths and injuries recorded for 4. The proposed housing colony near the southern end of the corridor needs to
a period of eight years between 1997 and 2010 revealed that on average two be prevented from coming up as it will further threaten the corridor.
people were killed and a similar number injured every year by wild elephants.
Most of the human deaths had occurred on roads, or in crop fields while crops 6. Mining and stone quarries near the corridor need to be prohibited. Recently,
were being guarded at night. stone quarries near corridor were sealed by the Mines and Geological Department
at the request of the Karnataka Forest Department.
On an average two elephants per year were also found to be killed due to human-
elephant conflict in this area. The major cause of death was electrocution, resulting Land identified to secure the corridor
from the illegal power lines laid by farmers around their crop fields. The season in
which migratory elephants arrive coincides with the peak cropping season, thus Village Extent of area (acres) Status of the land
increasing encounters between humans and elephants. This results in the loss of Patta
crops as well as human lives, and the retaliatory killing of elephants. Patta
Jayapuradoddi 35
Patta
CONSERVATION PLAN
Patta
Bilaganaguppa 52 Patta

590 591
8.02
Tali - Bilikkal
This corridor lies in the Jawalagiri Range of Cauvery North Wildlife Sanctuary
(Hosur Forest Division), Tamil Nadu and Bannerghatta National Park, Karnataka.
It connects the Tali Reserve Forest of the northern part of Cauvery North Wildlife
Sanctuary with the Bilikkal State Forest of Bannerghatta National Park. Elephants
3D map showing the landscape of the Tali-Bilikkal Corridor

from the northern part of Bannerghatta National Park move to Cauvery Wildlife
Sanctuary, Karnataka through Cauvery North Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu and
private lands between Dodduru and Belalam villages. Although the corridor has
connectivity on the Karnataka side, it is disconnected near Belalam village on one
side of the state highway after Belalam village towards Marulvadi.
State Tamil Nadu and Karnataka

Connectivity Bannerghatta National Park to
Cauvery North Wildlife Sanctuary
(Hosur Forest Division)
Length and Width 2.2-2.5 km and 0-1.5 km
77° 34’ 50”- 77° 36’ 20” E
Legal status Private Land and Reserve Forest

Major land use Settlements and forest
Major habitation/settlements Chennangibayyailthoddi, Alappan-
thoddi, Belalam and Dodduru
Forest type Tropical deciduous and scrub forests
Corridor habitat status: A total of 34 plant species were recorded in the

sampled area. Of these, 22 species were found to be palatable to elephants.
592 593
Maximum average GBH was noticed in Vitex altissima (72.5 cm), followed by
Cochlospermum religiosum (48.5 cm) and Ficus benghalensis (45 cm). Signs of
lopping and wood cutting were seen on almost all tree species, especially
elephant food species. Ground cover vegetation was dominated by shrubs
(45%), grasses (30%), herbs (15%) and barren ground (10%).

Hosur Forest Division: 250-300
Map of the Tali-Bilikkal Corridor area showing the land to be secured

(Synchronised Elephant Census, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical deciduous and scrub forests
Revenue land: Encroached by local people
Human settlements: Belalam, Chatthiramdoddi, Alappandoddi,
Channangibayilthodi, Munthimayanthoddi, Dodduru
Agricultural land
Buildings/Artefacts: Poultry farm, solar fence, Elephant Proof Trench (EPT)
Road: Tali-Marulvadi, Chatthiramdoddi-Kottarinatta, Chatthiramdoddi-Vosapama
and Tanda-Vosapama

Elephant Reserve: Mysore Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Bannerghatta National Park

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Dodduru, Chennangibayyailthoddi, Alappanthoddi and Belalam
settlements have severed the forest connectivity.
2. Encroachment: The Tamil Nadu part of the corridor is located in revenue
594 595
land that has been encroached upon by six families for many years. This Bandedoddi, Thasarampalli, Bensekkaldoddi, Belalam, Sivanalidoddi,
encroachment has completely disconnected the corridor. Lakshmipuram (Tamil Nadu), and Dodduru (Karnataka)
3. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing is a severe threat affecting the quality of the Human-Elephant Conflict: The cultivation of palatable crops in corridor fringe
corridor habitat, followed by wood cutting and fodder collection. Relentless areas attracts elephants. Elephants are deliberately invading agriculture areas,
felling of the recruitment classes of tree saplings has caused a remarkable mostly in December and January, as they prefer the taste and nutritional value of
depletion of tree density in the overall vegetation cover. Recruitment class trees crops over wild plants.
are deemed suitable to make poles for edge fencing and for the construction of
houses, and were found to be selectively removed by local people. Fuelwood is Records of human deaths due to elephants and ex-gratia relief provided for crop
mostly collected by women. damage between 2001 and 2013 in the Hosur Forest Division reveal that the
division experienced severe human-elephant conflict. A total of 49 human deaths
Name of the village Cattle grazing were reported within a period of 12 years. Eight human casualties were also
(No. of cattle) reported between 2011 and 2015 in the jurisdiction area of Tali Forest Range.
Balagaari 250-300
Basuvanpura 75-150 CONSERVATION PLAN
Daverbetta 350-500
Chathiram doddi 300-450
protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and development
4. Electric fence and Elephant Proof Trench: The Tamil Nadu Forest Department
has erected an electric fence on the forest boundary of Jawalagiri Range and the
2. In consultation with the villagers and the revenue department, about 28 acres
Karnataka Forest Department has created Elephant Proof Trenches (EPTs) in the
of revenue encroachment land (Survey Numbers 252 to 267), consisting of six
corridor areas, completely blocking elephant movement.
houses and agriculture land in Channangibayilthoddi and Alappanthoddi villages
(Tamil Nadu), and 11 acres of patta land consisting of a poultry farm (eight acres)
5. Traffic: The Tali-Marulvadi road bisects the elephant corridor near Belalam.
and agriculture land (three acres) near Munthimayanthoddi village (Karnataka),
Movement of heavy vehicles seems to be very low, with four-wheelers and
are to be secured as Priority I to establish a corridor width of about 500 m.
two-wheelers mainly shuttling between Marulvadi and Tali throughout the day.
Another 39 acres adjoining these lands in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka could also
An average of 20-25 vehicles per hour was observed during the study period. A
be secured as Priority II to establish a width of about 700 m.
higher number of six-wheelers was recorded between 6 am and 8 am.
3. Villages are protected by Elephant Proof Trenches (EPTs) which severely

Corridor Villages: Alappanthoddi and Channangibayilthoddi (Tamil Nadu);
hinder the free movement of elephants. These have to be strategically placed to
Munthimayanthoddi and Keriyanthoddi (Karnataka)
prevent conflict while facilitating animal movement.
Corridor dependent villages: Balagarai, Thataparuur, Basuvanpura, Daverbetta,

4. Vehicular traffic needs to be regulated in the mornings and evenings.
596 597
8.03
Bilikkal – Javalagiri
This corridor connects Bilikkal State Forest of Bannerghatta National Park,

Karnataka, with Javalagiri Reserve Forest of Cauvery North Wildlife Sanctuary
3D map showing the landscape of the Bilikkal – Javalagiri Corridor

(Hosur Forest Division), Tamil Nadu. Elephants move from Bannerghatta National
Park to the southern portion of Hosur Forest Division through a narrow forest
located on the interstate boundary of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
State Tamil Nadu and Karnataka

Connectivity Bannerghatta NP (Karnataka) with
North Cauvery WLS (Tamil Nadu)
77° 35’ 21”- 77° 36’ 42” E

Major land use Forest and settlements
Forest type Tropical thorn forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal (October-April); small herds
to more than 80 elephants together
Corridor habitat status: Bamboo patches and mixed dry deciduous vegetation
are commonly found in this corridor. The tree cover is dominated by Acacia sp.
The GBH of trees ranged from 20-210 cm. Ground cover was dominated by
grasses (48%), shrubs (12%), herbs (15%) and barren ground (25%).
598 599

Hosur Forest Division: 250-300
(Synchronised Elephant Census, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical thorn forest
Settlements: Malliandoddi and Gurusullapandoddi
Agricultural land: Millet, maize, plantain and vegetables
Road: Kadukembattupalli-Hunsanahalli
Elephant Proof Trench and solar fence
Map of the Bilikkal – Javalagiri Corridor

Protected Area: North Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary and Bannerghatta National Park
IBA: Code. IN-KA-04, Criteria. A1, A2
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Kadasivanapalli, Kadakampattupalli, Malliandoddi and
Gurusullapandoddi villages are located on the corridor fringes and considerably
reduce the width of the corridor.
2. Temple: The Sri Bandemuthurayaswamy Temple is located at the entrance

of the corridor. Pilgrim activity during festivals exerts tremendous pressure on
elephant movement and degrades the quality of the corridor forest.
3. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing is a severe threat affecting the quality of the
corridor habitat, followed by wood cutting and fodder collection.
600 601
Corridor dependent villages: Kadakampattupalli and Kadasivanapalli villages

are located on the northern and southern sides of the corridor respectively.
The combined population of these villages is about 250 families. People depend
on the forest for cattle grazing and fuelwood collection. Malliandoddi (20-30
families) and Gurusullappandoddi (15-20 families) are other settlements near
the corridor.
Human-Elephant Conflict: The cultivation of palatable crops in corridor fringe

areas attracts elephants. Elephants are deliberately invading agriculture areas,
mostly in December and January, as they prefer the taste and nutritional value of
crops over wild plants.
Fig. 8.02: A tusker in the Bilikkal – Javalagiri Corridor

Records of human deaths due to elephants and ex-gratia relief provided for
crop damage between 2001 and 2013 in the Hosur Forest Division reveal that
the division experienced severe human-elephant conflict. A total of 49 human
deaths were reported within a period of 12 years. Eight human casualties were
also reported between 2011 and 2015 in the jurisdiction area of Tali Forest
Range.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and

legally protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and
602 603
8.04
Edayarhalli – Guttiyalattur
This corridor connects elephant habitats within Malai Madeshwara Wildlife

Sanctuary. Elephants from the Kollegal Forest Divison, Karnataka, move to
Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve, Tamil Nadu, through the bottleneck forest
3D map showing the landscape of the Edayarhalli – Guttiyalattur Corridor

between Solakobe village and the Kallatibyalur tribal settlement of Malai
Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary, Karnataka. The corridor is located very close to
the inter-state boundary of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
Alternate Name Kallatibyalur

State Karnataka
Connectivity Malai Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary
with Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve
77° 23’ 60”- 77° 25’ 10” E

Major habitation/settlements Erambadi tribal settlements and
Solekobe group of villages
Forest type Dry deciduous, mixed dry deciduous
and shrub forests
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal (May-July)
Corridor habitat status: A total of eight tree species were recorded in the
sampled area within the corridor. Swietenia sp, Terminalia catappa, Hardwickia
binata and Tectona grandis were the predominant species in this corridor.
604 605
Bamboo patches are available in the valleys. Ground cover included grasses
(25%), shrubs (10%), herbs (45%) and barren ground (20%).

Hoogyam Range of Malai Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary: 70-80
(Synchronised Elephant Population Estimation, Karnataka, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Dry deciduous, mixed dry deciduous and shrub
Road: Hoogyam-Minnayam-Ramapura
Map of the Edayarhalli – Guttiyalattur Corridor

Protected Area: Malai Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats:
1. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing and fuelwood collection by people from corridor
dependent villages has considerably reduced the quality of the corridor forest.
2. Encroachment: Encroachment by five families in Kallatibyalur has further

reduced the width of the corridor.
Corridor dependent villages: Erambadi tribal settlements and Solekobe group of

villages.
There is a group of tribal settlements and villages located on either side of the
corridor: Kallatibyalur (five families), Erambadi (100 families) and Solekobe (100-
125 families). They depend on the forest for cultivation, which is their primary
livelihood, as well as for cattle grazing and fuelwood collection.
606 607
Human-Elephant conflict: No human deaths or cases of human injury caused

by elephants have been reported for the past one decade in and around the
corridor. Nor has there been any conflict-related elephant mortality. However,
crop depredation by elephants is reported from the area.
CONSERVATION PLAN

2. Encroachments in Kallatibyalur should be removed in consultation with
Fig. 8.03: A corridor dependent village

settlers.
608 609
8.05
Edayarhalli – Doddasampige
This corridor connects Edayarhalli Reserve Forest of Malai Madeshwara Wildlife

Sanctuary with Doddasampige Reserve Forest of Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple
(BRT) Tiger Reserve.The elephant range to the east of the Biligirirangan Hills has
3D map showing the landscape of the Edayarhalli – Doddasampige Corridor

been divided by a long strip of cultivated land, extending south from the town
of Kollegal to the Tibetan settlement at Byloor for a total distance of 50 km. This
strip had nearly cut off Doddasampige Reserve Forest from Edayarhalli Reserve
Forest. In 2003, Wildlife Trust of India and the Asian Nature Conservation
Foundation (ANCF) secured this corridor by purchasing 25.5 acres of land
from Aandipalaya village located between the villages of Kurubaradoddi and
Budipaduga along the Kollegal-Satyamangalam highway.
Alternate names Bekkatur-Arabikere, Kollegal

State Karnataka
Connectivity BRT Tiger Reserve and Malai
Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary
77° 15’ 21”- 77° 16’ 1” E
Legal status Reserve Forest and part of BRT

Wildlife Sanctuary
Forest type Tropical thorn and mixed deciduous
610 611
area of 0.4 ha. Of these, 27 species (more than 50%) are palatable to elephants.
The dominant plant species were Chloroxylon swietenia, Acacia ferruguinea and
Randia malabarica. More exotic plants, such as Lantana camara, Doddonea
viscosa and Flugea leucopyrus were noticed in the regeneration class. A similar
Map of the Edayarhalli- Doddasampige corridor showing the land secured by WTI and ANCF
trend was noticed in the recruitment class.

BRT Tiger Reserve: 617 (335-976)
Malai Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary (Kollegal Forest Division): 278 (278-601)
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical thorn and mixed dry deciduous forest
Road: Kollegal-Sathyamangalam (State Highway 38)

Protected Area: Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple (BRT) Tiger Reserve
IBA: Code. IN-KA-07, Criteria. A1, A2, A3
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Habitat quality was very poor in the corridor forest. Exotic plants (Lantana
camara, Doddonea viscose, Flugea leucopyrus etc) outnumbered endemic species
in the regeneration and recruitment classes. Weed proliferation might further
worsen the habitat quality in the near future and needs to be managed. Lopping
of trees is also an important concern.
612 613
2. Livestock pressure on the corridor vegetation was found to be high, as

evidenced by the occurrence of cattle dung as well as sheep and goat pellets.

Corridor dependent villages: Bekkatur, Arabikere, Hosadoddi, Kurubaradoddi,
Budipaduga and Silaikattanadoddi
Fig. 8.04: A view of the land purchased to secure the Edayarhalli – Doddasampige Corridor
CONSERVATION PLAN

2. Suitable eco-development activities need to be initiated in corridor fringe

villages, especially to reduce fuelwood extraction and cattle grazing. Energy-
efficient cook stoves could be provided to the villagers to minimise fuelwood
extraction.
REMARKS
The agricultural land of Aandipalaya village in the corridor area had considerably
reduced the width of the corridor. Realising the importance of this corridor, WTI
and ANCF secured 25.5 acres of corridor land from 17 landowners in 2003. The
secured land was later transferred to the Karnataka Forest department through
a formal MoU in 2009, so that it could be maintained as an elephant corridor as
well as incorporated as part of the Protected Area network. The secured land
has recently been included as part of Malai Madeshwara Wildlife Sanctuary.
614 615
8.06
Chamarajanagar – Talamalai at
Punjur
3D map showing the landscape of the Chamrajanagar – Talamalai at Punjur corridor

Located at the inter-state boundary of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, this corridor
connects the K Gudi Range of Chamarajanagar Wildlife Division (BRT Tiger
Reserve) with the Thalavadi Range of Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve through
the Punjur Range. Elephants from Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve move to
BRT Tiger Reserve through narrow forest patches and private lands between
Hosaboddoddi, Srinivasapuram and Kolipalaya villages.
Alternate name Punjur-Kolipalaya

State Karnataka
Connectivity BRT Tiger Reserve and
Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve
Length and Width 3.6 km – 4.05 km and 0.04-0.1 km
Geographical coordinates 11° 46’ - 11° 47’ N
77° 05’- 77° 06’ E

Major land use Forest, agriculture and settlements
Major habitation/settlements Srinivasapuram, Hosaboddoddi,
Muneeshwara Colony
Forest type Tropical thorn and deciduous forest
area of 0.3 ha. Of these, 15 were elephant food species. Erythroxylum monogynum,
Chloroxylon swietenia and Ixora Pavetta were the dominant tree species. It was
616 617
quite interesting to note that Eucalyptus sp was extensively debarked by elephants

in this corridor. The availability of other ecological resources also plays a major
part in the regular use of this corridor by elephants, with bamboo patches and
natural salt licks available in plenty.
The ground cover in 0.015 ha of the corridor area was grasses (60%), shrubs
(22%), herbs (16%) and barren ground (2%). Although a considerable number of
Map of Chamrajanagar – Talamalai at Punjur corridor area showing the land to be secured
cattle grazed in and around the corridor area every day, the grass cover was not
overly affected. The livestock grazing pressure was, however, evidenced from the
low proportion of herbs and shrubs.

Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve: 877 (648-1174)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical thorn and deciduous forest
Settlements: Hosaboddoddi, Srinivasapuram and Muneeshwara Colony
Agricultural land
Road: National Highway 209 (Sathyamangalam-Mysore)

Mountain Range: Eastern ghats
Protected Area: Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve and BRT Tiger Reserve
Biosphere Reserve: Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve
618 619
HUMAN DIMENSIONS Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is reasonably high in the region. Records from
2003 to 2015 of the frequency of elephant deaths due to electrocution, as well as
Threats ex-gratia relief paid for crop damage by elephants, reveal an increasing trend of
1. Human settlements: Hosaboddoddi, Srinivasapuram and Muneeshwara Colony human-elephant conflict from the year 2006 onwards.
located inside the corridor have severely hindered the movement of elephants
and other wild animals. Land use has changed drastically along the corridor and in fringe areas over the
last two decades. Tribal settlements have been converted into civil constructions
2. Traffic on NH 209: A vehicular traffic survey conducted on this stretch in 2015 and barren lands converted into agricultural lands, with the result that the corridor
showed about 116.8 vehicles per hour, with almost 2800 to 3000 vehicles plying width has shrunk from 1000 metres to less than 100 metres. This has forced
every day. This is an increase of about 30% compared to traffic volume on the elephants to venture into adjacent agricultural lands and human habitations,
same stretch in 2010. The movement of six-wheel vehicles was high compared to resulting in increased crop depredation and economic losses to the farmers.
four- and two-wheel vehicles. Peak movement of six-wheelers carrying agricultural
produce to Sathyamangalam and other places was between 8 pm and 4 am
CONSERVATION PLAN
(coinciding with the peak of wildlife movement), and between 12 noon and 4
pm. Most four-wheelers plied between 6 am and 12 noon, and two-wheelers
between 8 am and 5 pm. Vehicular traffic was seen to increase drastically during
the Kundam festival (March-April) at Bannari Amman Temple.
3. Roadside hotels are located about 300 metres from the Punjur Forest Checkpost.
2. In consultation with villagers, about 126 acres of the corridor land belonging
Elephants generally cross the highway during the night hours. The movement of
to 86 families in the Hosaboddoddi and Srinivasapuram settlements needs to be
vehicles as well as people affects elephant movement. Food waste thrown out
secured on a priority basis. To further strengthen the corridor, efforts should be
can attract also animals including elephants.
made to secure land from Muneeshwara Colony in the second stage, following
due consultations with the local community.
Corridor villages: There are three tribal settlements (Hosaboddoddi: 39 families;
Srinivasapuram: 47 families and Muneeshwara Colony: 63 families) located in
3. No construction should be allowed on either side of NH 209 in the area passing
the corridor. More than 86% of the inhabitants are farmers with agriculture as
their primary source of income. Although no irrigation facilities are available, they
depend on rain-fed agriculture and undertake cultivation for six months in a year.
4. Vehicular speeds on the NH 209 stretch that passes through the corridor
should be regulated with speed breakers. A flyover could be also constructed for
The education status indicates that more than 50% of the population here has no
vehicular movement on this stretch of the highway.
formal education or is illiterate, and about 25% has primary education.
Corridor dependent villages: Hosaboddoddi, Banavadi, Srinivasapuram, Edthe

Gouda Doddi, Muneeshwara Colony, Bejipalya and Punjur
620 621
8.07
Chamarajanagar – Talamalai at
MudDahalli
3D map showing the landscape of the Chamrajanagar – Talamalai at Muddahalli Corridor

This corridor connects the Punjur Range of Chamarajanagar Wildlife Division (BRT
Tiger Reserve) with the Thalavadi Range of Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve and is
located at the inter-state boundary of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Elephants from
Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve move to BRT Tiger Reserve through narrow forest
patches and private lands between Goramadu Doddi and Dodda Muddahalli
villages. The corridor is regularly used by elephants, tigers and other wild animals.
Alternate name Thalavadi-Muddahalli

State Karnataka and Tamil Nadu
Connectivity BRT Tiger Reserve and
SathyamangalamTiger Reserve
77° 3’ 50”- 77° 4’ 20” E
Legal status Reserve forest

Major land use Forest and settlements
Major habitation/settlements Goramadu Doddi, Dodda Muddahalli
Forest type Tropical deciduous and thorn forest
area of 0.3 ha. Of these, 25 species are palatable to elephants. Maximum average
622 623
GBH was noticed in Eucalyptus sp (84.5 cm), followed by Ficus benghalensis (53.5 cm)
and Butea monosperma (51.0 cm). Signs of lopping and wood cutting were seen
on all trees, especially elephant food species like Acorus calamus, Erythroxylon
monogynum, Ixora pavetta, Decalepis hamiltonii and Somida fabrifuga. Ground
cover vegetation in 0.015 ha of sampled corridor area consisted of grasses (50%),
shrubs (20%), herbs (15%) and barren ground (15%) .
Map of the Chamrajanagar – Talamalai at Muddahalli Corridor showing the land to be secured
Forest/Land use
Settlements: Goramadu Doddi, Dodda Muddahalli
Agriculture: Ginger, banana, maize and beans

Protected Area: SathyamangalamTiger Reserve and BRT Tiger Reserve
Biosphere Reserve: Nilgiri Bioshpere Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: Expansion of villages such as Dodda Muddahalli, Goramadu
Doddi and Mookanpalya along the corridor fringes has decreased the width of
the corridor.
624 625
2. Traffic on NH 209: A vehicular traffic survey conducted on this stretch in 2015 for the high influx of elephants during the dry season, mainly because of the
showed about 116.8 vehicles per hour, with almost 2800 to 3000 vehicles plying perennial Suwarnavathi reservoir which is near the corridor.
every day. This is an increase of about 30% compared to traffic volume on the
same stretch in 2010. The movement of six-wheel vehicles was high compared to
four- and two-wheel vehicles. Peak movement of six-wheelers carrying agricultural CONSERVATION PLAN
produce to Sathyamangalam and other places was between 8 pm and 4 am
(coinciding with the peak of wildlife movement), and between 12 noon and 4
pm. Most four-wheelers plied between 6 am and 12 noon, and two-wheelers
between 8 am and 5 pm. Vehicular traffic was seen to increase drastically during
the Kundam festival (March-April) at Bannari Amman Temple.
2. In consultation with villagers, 27.39 acres of land belonging to six families from
Goramadu Doddi, and 10 acres of forest leased land from the Muddahalli Joint
Corridor dependent villages: Dodda Muddahalli (97 families) Boodhipaduga,
Farming Cooperative Society, should be secured as a priority to increase the
Chiku Muddahalli, Kumbaragundi, Goramadu Doddi (39 families), Mookanpalya.
width of the corridor.
Since the corridor is very close to Goramadu Doddi and Dodda Muddahalli,
3. No construction should be allowed on either side of the national highway
most of the villagers’ needs are being met from the corridor areas. People are
passing through the corridor.
dependent on the forest for fuelwood and NTFP collection, and preparation of
agricultural products.
4. In consultation with the National Highway Authority of India, speed breakers
should be created on the stretch passing through the corridor to minimise
Almost 50% of the families here depend on agriculture for sustenance. More
vehicular speeds and facilitate elephant movement.
than 50% of the people are illiterate or have no formal education.

Human-Elephant Conflict: Incidents of crop depredation by elephants and of
elephant deaths due to electrocution indicate that human-elephant conflict has
Extent of area
been on the rise since 2006. Human-carnivore conflict is also a major concern. S.No Village Land status
(acres)
About 158 livestock deaths were reported between February 2009 and May 2011
in and around Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve (Satheesh et al., 2011); 36 livestock 1 Goramadu Doddi Wet Land
deaths were reported from BRT Tiger Reserve during the same period. 3.25
2 Goramadu Doddi Wet Land
The perception of villagers living on the corridor fringes is that human-elephant 3 Goramadu Doddi 3.12 Wet Land
conflict is high (67.5%). Most of them felt that the intensity of conflict has increased
over the years (80%) and occurs throughout the year (67%). This area is known
626 627
4 Goramadu Doddi 4.38 Wet Land
7
Muddahalli 10.0 Dry Land
Fig. 8.06: Elephants moving through the Chamarajanagar – Talamalai at Muddahalli Corridor
Total 37.39
Fig. 8.05: A view of the Chamrajanagar- Talamalai at Muddahalli corridor
628 629
8.08
Talamalai – Guttiyalattur
This corridor connects elephant habitats between Guttiyalattur Reserve Forest

and Talamalai Reserve Forest of Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve. Elephants from
Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve move to the Coimbatore Forest Division through
3D map showing the landscape of the Talamalai – Guttiyalattur Corridor

Nilgiri North Division between Bannari, Karachikorai, Pudubirkadavu, Pungar,
Patramangalam, Sujalkuttai and Rajan Nagar villages.
Alternate name Sujalkuttai- Bannari

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Moyar Valley and Nilgiri Eastern Slope
RF with Guttiyalattur RF and vice-versa
77° 5’ 46”- 77° 8’ 26” E

Major land use Forest, settlements and fallow lands
Major habitation/settlements Pudubirkadavu and Patramangalam
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular (mostly October to December)

Nilgiri North Forest Division: 272
Coimbatore Forest Division: 400
(Synchronised Elephant Population Estimation, Tamil Nadu, 2012)
630 631
Forest/Land use
Settlements: Puthubirkadavu and Patramangalam
Agriculture: Banana, paddy, vegetables

Map of the Talamalai- Guttiyalattur Corridor showing the lands to be secured

Protected Area: Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: The expansion of Puthubirkadavu and Patramangalam villages has
considerably decreased the width of the corridor.
2. Intensive agricultural activities of the above villages have reached the foothills of
Talamalai Reserve Forest, obstructing elephant movement. People from nearby
areas are also purchasing land near the corridor.
3. A farm house has recently come up close to the corridor; this will pose a serious
threat to the free movement of elephants in future.
4. High vehicular traffic on NH 209 (Sathyamangalam-Mysore), which passes

through the corridor. According to a 2015 survey 116.8 vehicles ply per hour and
almost 2800-3000 vehicles ply every day.
5. Fuelwood collection for commercial uses is an important threat to corridor habitat

quality. The selective felling of elephant food species has degraded the corridor.
632 633
6. Livestock grazing in the corridor area has reduced the availability of regeneration 4. Vehicular speeds should be regulated by suitable barriers on NH 209 in the
and recruitment saplings of elephant food species as well as cover plants. corridor area, especially between 9 pm and 5 am. Adequate mitigation measures
are needed to minimise the impact of the NH 209 expansion.
7. Potential linear infrastructure threats: The proposed establishment of a railway line
between Mettupalayam and Chamrajanagar, and a highway between Siriyur and 5. Elephant Proof Trenches and/or fencing obstructing elephant movement
Bhavanisagar, would affect the movement of elephants and other wild animals. should be removed and not be encouraged to mitigate human-elephant conflict.
Although these projects have been shelved as of now they could still pose a threat
in future.
Corridor villages: Pudubirkadavu and Patramangalam
Extent of area Land use
Corridor dependent villages: Bannari, Karachikorai, Pudubirkadavu, Pungar, (acres)
Patramangalam, Sujalkuttai, Rajan Nagar Priority I
1.13 Recently modified for agricultural practices
Human-Elephant Conflict: The trend in and around the Talamalai-Guttiyalattur 3.17 Recently modified for agricultural practices
corridor between 1996 and 2007 reveals that till the year 2000, elephant poaching 2.5 Agriculture land
(n=6) was higher than human deaths caused by elephants (n=2) as well as 0.86 Fallow land
elephant deaths due to conflict (n=1). After that, elephant deaths especially due 2.17 Recently modified for agricultural practices
to electrocution, and human deaths caused by elephants, increased considerably 4.12 Agriculture land
compared to poaching. This could also be due to better enforcement by the state 5.63 Agriculture land
forest department, but human-elephant conflict has increased during the past 5.83 Agriculture land
few years, mainly because of increased biotic pressure due to human population
Priority II
growth, increased vehicular traffic and changed cropping patterns.
4.32 Agriculture land & settlement
4 Agriculture land & settlement
CONSERVATION PLAN
2.68 Agriculture land & settlement
36.4 acres
2. In consultation with villagers, 25.41 acres of land need to be secured as Priority

I and 11 acres as Priority II.
3. A farm house close to the corridor needs to be closed.
634 635
8.09
Kallhatti – Sigur at Glencorin
This corridor connects Singara Reserve Forest of Mudumalai Tiger Reserve and
3D map showing the landscape of the Kallhatti- Sigur at Glencorin Corridor

Kallhatti Reserve Forest of Nilgiri North Division. Elephants from Nilgiri North
Division move to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve and Bandipur Tiger Reserve through
the northern foothills of Kallhatti Mountains near Glanton Inn Hotel at Glencorin.
Alternate name Glencorin

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Singara Reserve Forest with Kallhatti
Reserve Forest through Bokkapuram
Reserve Forest
76° 41’ 7”- 76° 43’ 22” E
Legal status Private Land and Reserve Forest

Major land use Forest, resorts and estates
Corridor habitat status: A total of 18 plant species were identified in a sampled

area of three hectares. The predominant tree species in this corridor is
Cantheum parviflorum. Other tree species found in this corridor include Acacia
chundra, Erithroxylon monogynum, Gardenia sp etc. All of them are palatable to
elephants.
636 637

Mudumalai Tiger Reserve: 840
Forest/Land use
Buildings/Artefacts: Anti-poaching camp, Glanton Inn Hotel
Map of the Kallhatti- Sigur at Glencorin Corridor showing the lands to be secured
Road: Mudumalai-Ooty State Highway

Mountain Range: Western Ghats
Elephant Reserve: Nilgiri Elephant Reserve
IBA: Code. IN-TN-17, Criteria. A1, A2, A3
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Developmental activities: The land in Kallhatti-Sigur was left fallow for several
decades. Now, due to an escalation in land prices, people have started clearing
their patta lands and selling them at high prices to people from nearby towns.
Two resorts have come up in this area, forcing elephants to use the foothills.
(These resorts also take tourists to the corridor areas for wildlife sightings
throughout the day and at night.) The forest department has an anti-poaching
camp in the corridor which also blocks the unhindered movement of elephants.
2. Vehicular traffic: The Mudumalai-Ooty State Highway passes through the

corridor. Ooty (Udhagamandalam), the famous hill station, is located just
about 20 kilometers from the corridor. This road is open from 6 am to 8 pm
but vehicular movement is seen throughout the day and night. Late evening
elephant movement is affected by traffic on this road.
638 639
Corridor dependent villages: Mavinhalla, Vazhaithottam, Hullathi and Chockanalli
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is low in this area due to the fact that most
of the land is being used by tourist resorts and there is little cultivation of crops.
Most of the human deaths reported in this area are of people who venture
carelessly into the forest.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Fig. 8.07: An elephant crossing road in Kallhatti – Sigur at Glencorin Corridor

2. In consultation with landowners, 45.2 acres of identified land (resorts and

fallow lands from Hullathi village) needs to be secured.
3. Cattle grazing should not be allowed in the corridor areas during the elephant
migratory season. Cattle reared in corridor fringe villages should be vaccinated
every year against foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), anthrax, rinderpest and other
diseases that are transmitted to wildlife.
4. Awareness programmes targeting villagers living in corridor fringe areas,

as well as tourist resorts, tourist guides, local jeep drivers and tourists should
be carried out through campaigns informing them about the criticality of the
corridor, the increased human-elephant conflict in the area due to land use
changes and obstructions to the corridor, and how the securing of the corridor
could help minimise conflict.

Area (acres) Village Priority
28.12 Hullathi P1
17.1 Hullathi P1
640 641
8.10
Avarahalla - Sigur
This corridor connects Avarahalla Reserve Forest of Mudumalai Tiger Reserve

with Sigur Reserve Forest of Nilgiri North Division. Elephants from Nilgiri North
Division move to Bandipur Tiger Reserve through Mudumalai Tiger Reserve,
between the villages of Chemmanatham and Mavinhalla.
3D map showing the landscape of the Avarahalla – Sigur Corridor

Alternate name Mavinhalla-Chemmanatham
State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Mudumalai Tiger Reserve with Nilgiri
North Division
76° 39’ 54”- 76° 41’ 11” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Revenue Forest,

Private Land
Major land use Forest, resorts and settlements
Major habitation/settlements Mavinhalla and Chemmanatham
area of 0.03 ha. Of these, four species are palatable to elephants. Signs of wood
cutting were recorded in 10 tree species, of which four were elephant food
species: Randia dumetorum, Diospyros montana, Cordia gharf and Zyziphus sp. The
availability of other ecological resources plays a major part in the regular use of
this corridor by elephants, with bamboo patches and natural salt licks available.
Ground cover in the corridor was represented by shrubs (15%), grasses (25%),
herbs (20%) and barren ground (40%).
642 643

Forest/Land use
Buildings/Artefacts: Tourist resorts
Human settlements: Mavinhalla and Chemmanatham
Road: Mavinhalla-Chemmanatham road

Map of the Avarahalla - Sigur Corridor

Elephant Reserve Name & No: Nilgiri Elephant Reserve (No.23)
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: The corridor’s width has been considerably reduced by Mavinhalla

and Chemmanatham villages, which are located on either side of it.
2. Cattle grazing: This is a major problem in this corridor. Cattle use the corridor
frequently and branches of elephant fodder trees are cut for livestock.
3. Resorts: Most of the resorts in the area are located near the corridor. Resort
owners take their guests to view wildlife in the late evenings and early mornings,
and even at night. Some abandoned resorts were reopened recently and pose a
threat to the free movement of elephants.
644 645
Corridor dependent villages: Mavinhalla (150 families), Chemmanatham (35

families)
Human-Elephant conflict: Some 12 elephant deaths and 13 human deaths due

to conflict were reported in and around the corridor area between 2001 and
2013. Conflict has increased during the past few years due to biotic pressure,
human population growth, vehicular traffic, changed cropping patterns etc.
CONSERVATION PLAN
Fig. 8.08: A view of the Avarahalla - Sigur Corridor

encroachment and development activities detrimental to animal movement.
2. Tourism activities (night safaris, disposal of garbage etc) should be strictly

controlled in the corridor area.
3. Cattle grazing should not be allowed in the corridor area during the elephant
every year against foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), anthrax, rinderpest and
other diseases that are transmitted to wildlife.
646 647
8.11
Kalmalai – Singara and Avarahalla
This corridor lies between the villages of Singara and Masinagudi on the
3D map showing the landscape of the Kalmalai – Singara and Avarahalla Corridor
northern slopes of the Nilgiri Hills. It comprises forests on either side of the road
connecting these two villages. Approximately 50 metres of the forest on either
side of the road is privately owned. The corridor is intensively used by elephants
that seasonally move from Mudumalai Tiger Reserve to Nilgiri North Division. As
movement is not possible along the Nilgiri slopes (due to penstock pipes of a
hydro-electric project between Glenmorgan and Singara), this corridor is of great
significance.
Alternate name Singara-Masinagudi

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Kalmalai Reserve Forest of Mudumalai
Tiger Reserve with Singara Reserve
Forest of Nilgiri North Division
76° 36’ 33”- 76° 39’ 18” E
Legal status Private Land

Corridor habitat status: A total of 42 tree species were reported in the sampled
area of three hectares. The predominant tree species were Anogeissus latifolia
648 649
(47 per ha), Randia dumetorum (59 per ha), Zyziphus xylopyrus (18 per ha) and
Erythroxylon monogynum (18 per ha). The overall tree density was estimated at
327 per ha. The density of elephant-preferred fodder tree species was 111 per
ha. Apart from migration, elephants are attracted to the corridor area due to
abundant food species, availability of perennial water sources and seven major
salt licks.

Map of the Kalmalai – Singara and Avarahalla Corridor

Forest/Land use
Estate: Singara estate
Human settlements: Masinagudi, Achakarai, Singara, Bokkapuram and Thodling
Agriculture land
River: Kallar
Road: Masinagudi-Singara

Protected Area: Mudumalai Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Developmental activities: Activities related to the Pykara Ultimate Stage Hydro-
electric Project (PUSHEP), and human settlements.
650 651
2. Traffic: The Singara-Masinagudi road passes through the corridor for about 2. Some 761.4 acres of private and revenue forest land needs to be secured in
three kilometres. On an average, 409 vehicles were recorded in the corridor consultation with the landowners.
during the day, mostly two-wheelers (n=118) and four-wheelers (n=284). During
the early mornings, late evenings and even at night, tourist resorts use this road 3. Jeep safaris, trekking and other wildlife viewing activities, whether on the
to show wildlife to their guests. Masinagudi-Singara road or inside private and revenue forests, need to be
controlled very strictly.
3. Tourism: Tourist resorts in the area organise vehicle safaris and trekking
for their guests into the private forests located in this corridor. This is a major 4. Cattle grazing should not be allowed in the corridor area during the elephant
problem for elephants, especially during migratory season. Vehicles from migratory season. Cattle reared in corridor fringe villages should be vaccinated
Masinagudi are also cleaned near the Kalhalla Bridge; this pollutes the water every year against foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), anthrax, rinderpest and other
used by wildlife (and people) downstream of the flume channel. diseases that are transmitted to wildlife.
4. Cattle grazing: Cattle compete with elephants and other wild herbivores for Land identified for securing the corridor
fodder resources in this corridor. The encounter rate of cattle dung is very high,
at 1176 dung piles per sq km. Extent of area (acres) Land status Priority
Corridor dependent villages: Masinagudi (500 households), Achakarai (35 346 Patta land (Private Forest) P1
households), Singara (40 households), Thodling (80 households), Bokkapuram 10.4 Patta land (Private Forest) P1
(150 households) 405 Revenue Forest P2

Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is very low in this corridor. People in the area
either only have coffee plantations (which are not affected by elephants) or patta
land that is left with its forest cover intact. Most of the people killed or injured in
this area ventured into the forest, either to view wildlife or to collect fuelwood
and cattle dung. There is no record of elephants damaging huts in this corridor.
CONSERVATION PLAN
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent encroachment of
corridor forest and developmental activities detrimental to the corridor.
652 653
8.12
Moyar – Avarahalla
This corridor connects Moyar Reserve Forest to Avarahalla Reserve Forest

of Mudumalai Tiger Reserve. Elephants from Nilgiri North Division move to
Bandipur Tiger Reserve through Mudumalai Tiger Reserve between Moyar and
3D Map showing the landscape of the Moyar – Avarahalla Corridor

Masinagudi villages.
Alternate name Masinagudi - Moyar

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity North-eastern and south-eastern part
of Mudumalai Tiger Reserve
76° 39’ 18”- 76° 42’ 44” E
Legal status Tiger Reserve

Corridor habitat status: The density of tree species in the Moyar-Avarahalla

corridor is approximately 15 per hectare, with 37 species of trees reported from
the corridor in the sampled plot of three hectares. The predominant tree species
include Randia dumatorum (40%), Cantheum parviflorum (12%), Acacia chundra
(5%), Erithroxylon monogynum and Gardenia sp (5%), all of which are palatable
to elephants. Three species of shrubs found in the corridor are also eaten
by elephants. Water bodies are abundant; there is a perennial flume channel
654 655
running from Masinagudi to Moyar village and two perennial ponds located in
this corridor. Two seasonal water courses are also found in the corridor.

Forest/Land use
Artefacts: Moyar flume channel
Road: Masinagudi-Moyar
Map of the Moyar – Avarahalla Corridor

Protected Area: Mudumalai Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Developmental activities: The major development activity in this area is the
Moyar hydro-electric power project.
2. Cattle grazing: Cattle are competing with elephants and other wild herbivores
for fodder. The encounter rate of cattle dung in this corridor is very high (919
dung piles per sq km).
3. Vehicular traffic is a major problem for elephants in this corridor. Jeep safaris
organised by resorts and local jeep drivers for wildlife viewing pose a severe
threat to the free movement of elephants and other animals.
656 657
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is very low in this corridor. Most of the people
killed or injured in the area ventured into the forest, either to view wildlife or to
collect fuelwood and cattle dung. There is no record of elephants damaging huts
in this corridor.
CONSERVATION PLAN
protected under an appropriate law; action should be taken to prevent illegal
construction or the diversion of forest land for non-forestry and developmental
activities and regulation of jeep safari for tourism in the corridor area.
Fig. 8.09: A view of the Moyar - Avarahalla Corridor

2. Cattle grazing should not be allowed in the corridor area during the elephant
every year against Foot-and-Mouth disease (FMD), anthrax, rinderpest and other
diseases that are transmitted to wildlife.
3. No developmental activities hindering elephant movement should be allowed

between Masinagudi, Moyar, Boothanatham and Chemmanatham villages.
4. Jeep safaris for wildlife viewing need to be regulated very strictly on the
road between Masinagudi and Moyar, particularly in the dry season when the
elephants needs to access the flume channel for water.
658 659
8.13
Kaniyanpura - Moyar
This corridor connects the Kaniyanpura Reserve Forest with the Moyar Reserve
Forest of Bandipur Tiger Reserve and is located on the inter-state boundary
3D map showing the landscape of the Kaniyanpura - Moyar Corridor

of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Elephants from Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve
move to Bandipur Tiger Reserve through narrow forests located between the
settlements of Kaniyanpura, Karagundi and Kaniyanpura Colony, and the steep
slopes of the Moyar gorge.
State Karnataka
Connectivity Bandipur Tiger Reserve to
Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve
76° 38’ 22”- 76° 44’ 49” E
Legal status Protected Area

Major land use Forest, plantations and settlement
Forest type Dry deciduous and mixed thorn forest
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular; seasonal, mostly during
October to January
Corridor habitat status: A total of nine tree species were recorded in the
sampled area of the corridor, of which seven are considered to be elephant food
species. Lagerstroemia lanceolata was the predominant species. Ground cover
comprised grasses (28%), shrubs (22%), herbs (8%) and barren ground (42%).
660 661

Bandipur Tiger Reserve: 1263 (674-2000)
(Synchronised Elephant Population Estimation, Karnataka, 2012)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Dry deciduous and mixed thorn forest
Settlements: Kaniyanpura, Karagundi and Kaniyanpura Colony
Agricultural land, barren land and plantations

Mountain Range: Western Ghats & Eastern Ghats
Map of the Kaniyanpura – Moyar Corridor

Protected Area: Bandipur and Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserves
IBA: IN-KA-03, Criteria: A1, A2
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing and fuelwood collection by people from corridor
dependent villages has considerably degraded the quality of the corridor forest.
2. The emergence of resorts near the corridor will pose serious problems in the
future.
Corridor dependent villages: Kaniyanpura Colony, Karagundi and Kaniyanpura.

Karagundi and Kaniyanpura in particular are located very close to the corridor.
Cultivation is less due to crop depredation by elephants. The community mainly
depends on the corridor forest for cattle grazing and fuelwood collection.
Community Names: Soligar, Lingayathar, Boyar.
662 663
Human-Elephant Conflict: Three elephant deaths were recorded due to

electrocution between 2009 and 2013 around the corridor area. The age of the
electrocuted elephants ranged from 10 to 20 years. The crop ex-gratia trend has
decreased drastically (15.3 lakhs to 2.3 lakhs) in this same period as agricultural
activity has lessened and mitigation measures have become more effective.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department.
2. Reduce dependency of fringe villagers on the corridor forest through suitable
Fig. 8.10: A tusker passing through the corridor

eco-developmental support and assistance.
3. More area (south of the Mangala-Jakkahalli-Yelchetti road) could be secured to

widen the corridor at its bottleneck. The Karnataka Forest Department has plans
to add more area to the corridor.
REMARKS
This corridor was initially quite narrow, just about 0.1 km at its widest. The
Karnataka Forest Department, with financial assistance from Project Elephant,
Ministry of Environment, and technical assistance from the Asian Nature
Conservation Foundation (ANCF), secured the adjacent revenue land and
annexed it to the Reserve Forest to widen the corridor near Karagundi village.
664 665
8.14
Begur - Brahmagiri
This corridor connects Begur Reserve Forest and the Tholpetty Range of
Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary with Brahmagiri Reserve Forest and the Srimangala
Range of Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary. The corridor is located on the inter-
3D map showing the landscape of the Begur – Brahmagiri Corridor

state boundary of Karnataka and Kerala. Elephants from Brahmagiri Wildlife
Sanctuary move to Nagarahole Tiger Reserve, Karnataka, through Wayanad
Wildlife Sanctuary and private coffee estates between Tholpetty village and Kutta
town. This corridor between Brahmagiri and Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuaries is in
addition to the Thirunelli-Kudrakote corridor, which has already been secured.
Alternate name Tholpetty

State Karnataka and Kerala
Connectivity Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary with
Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary and
Nagarahole Tiger Reserve
76° 0’ 36”- 76° 4’ 15” E
Legal status Private Land

Major land use Coffee estate and human habitation
Forest type Moist deciduous forest

Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary: 224 (elephant density of 2.0718 per sq km)
666 667
Hunsur Wildlife Division, Nagarahole Tiger Reserve: 408 (elephant density of 1.0
per sq km)
Forest/Land use
Forest Type: Tropical moist deciduous forest
Road: Mananthavady-Kutta State Highway
Map of the Begur - Brahmagiri Corridor showing the land to be secured

Elephant Reserve: Wayanad Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary and Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Coffee plantations: The Huvinakadu and Faith Coffee Estates in Karnataka and
Narikkal Coffee Estate in Kerala exert biotic pressure on the corridor area.
2. Vehicle traffic: The Mananthavady-Kutta State Highway bisects the corridor.

Vehicular traffic is high during the night, hindering the free movement of
elephants.
3. Electric fences and Elephant Proof Trenches (EPTs): All the coffee estates are
well protected by electric fences and EPTs, which completely block elephant
movement between Begur and Brahmagiri.
Corridor dependent villages: Tholpetty, Kutta and Poojekal
Human-Elephant Conflict: Records of ex-gratia support provided by the

Srimangala Range indicate that the level of human-elephant conflict is moderate.
No human or elephant death was reported till 2013-14, though six cases of
human injury due to elephants were recorded.
668 669
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. Electric fences and EPTs in the corridor area should be removed on a priority
basis.
3. About 375 acres of land identified in the Huvinakadu and Faith Coffee Estates
in Karnataka needs to be secured in consultation with the management of these
estates. Similarly, about 100 acres of land identified in the Narikkal Coffee Estate
in Kerala should be secured for the long-term conservation of elephants in the
Fig. 8.11: Power fencing near the corridor

region.
4. Inter-state border checkposts in the corridor area should be shifted.
5. No construction should be allowed on either side of the road passing through

the corridor.
670 671
8.15
Thirunelli - Kudrakote
The elephant habitats of north Karnataka along the Brahmagiri Hills are
connected to those on the Coorg plateau (also in Karnataka) through the
3D map showing the landscape of the Thirunelli – Kudrakote Corridor

northern Wayanad region of Kerala. The southern tip of the Brahmagiris extends
into Kerala’s Wayanad North Forest Division, where the Thirunelli Reserve Forest
and Kudrakote Reserve Forest provide a narrow eastward connection to the
Tholpetty Range of Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary. This is an important corridor
to maintain habitat contiguity for elephant populations along the Brahmagiri
Hills and has been secured by Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) and the Asian Nature
Conservation Foundation (ANCF) through the purchase of land and voluntary
rehabilitation of people from the corridor.
Alternate Name Brahmagiri-Thirunelli

State Kerala
Connectivity Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary with
Wayanad North Division (Kerala)
Length and Width 6 km and 1–1.5 km
76° 0’ 19”- 76° 3’ 55” E

Major land use Forest, agriculture
Forest type Tropical dry deciduous and teak
plantation
672 673
Corridor habitat status: A total of 41 tree species were recorded in corridor

villages. The most common species were Olea dioica, Dalbergia latifolia, Mallotus
tetracoccus, Cassia fistula, Largestroemia lanceolata and Coffea Arabica, which
accounted for more than 10% of the total trees. The dominant tree species
varied between the corridor villages: Olea dioica and Mallotus tetracoccus were
the most common in Kottapady and bamboo and Cinnamumam verum were
dominant in Puliyankolly.
Map of Thirunelli- Kudrakote corridor showing the secured land

Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary: 224 (elephant density of 2.0718 per sq km)
Wayanad North Division: 33 (elephant density of 0.3116 per sq km)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical dry deciduous and teak plantation
Human settlements: Edayurvayal (four other villages were
relocated by WTI), and homestays
Agriculture land
Buildings/Artefacts: Solar fencing, Elephant Proof Trench, forest timber depot
Road: Mananthavady-Thirunelli

Protected Area: Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Road: The Mananthavady-Thirunelli temple road passes through the corridor

for about six kilometres and is a threat to the free movement of elephants.
674 675
Vehicle movement is highest from 1 pm to 2 pm (54 vehicles), followed by 2 pm needs to be monitored regularly by WTI and the forest department to prevent
to 5 pm (20 vehicles) and 4 pm to 7 pm (14 vehicles). Eighty-six vehicles were land use changes. ANCF has also secured 12 acres of land from Sultharvayal.
recorded on the road between 6 am and 10 am, and 56 vehicles between 8 pm
and 6 am. As most elephants cross the road in the late evenings and at night, the 3. About 12 acres of land in Thirulakunnu, currently under the ownership of
threat from road traffic is not severe. However, vehicular movement increases a private tourism company, should be secured by the forest department and
drastically during festivals at the Thirunelli Temple, significantly hindering the added to the Protected Area network. This land has already been declared as
movement of elephants. Ecologically Fragile Land (under Section 4 of the EFL Act).
Corridor villages: Five villages were located inside the corridor: Valiya Emmady,
Thirulakunnu, Kottapady, Puliyankolly and Edayurvayal. Of these, the first
four had considerably reduced the width of the corridor. These villages have
been relocated by Wildlife Trust of India and the Kerala Forest Department to
alternate sites where the villagers were provided with agricultural land, new
houses and other amenities. WTI handed over the secured corridor lands to the
forest department for further legal protection and these have been notified as
part of Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary and Wayanad North Division.
Corridor dependent villages: Edayurvayal (10 families) and Panavally
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is quite high in and around the corridor area.
Some 23 cases of human injury and 24 human deaths were reported from the
region between 2001 and 2013.
CONSERVATION PLAN
development activities hindering elephant movement.
2. Four corridor villages were secured by WTI through the purchase of 25.4
acres of land and voluntary relocation of 37 families. The secured land has been
notified as part of Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary and Wayanad North Division, but Fig. 8.12: Elephants passing through the Thirunelli-Kudrakote corridor
676 677
8.16
Kottiyur – Periya
The Kottiyur-Periya corridor is located within the Periya Reserve Forest (Periya
Range) of Wayanad North Forest Division and Kottiyur Range of Kannur Forest
Division extending up to Kottiyur Reserve Forest of Kottiyur Wildlife Sanctuary
3D map showing the landscape of the Kottiyur – Periya Corridor

under Kannur Forest Division. Elephants from Wayanad North Division move
to Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary through Kannur Forest Division and Wayanad
Wildlife Sanctuary, via the narrow and undulating forests, rubber estates and
agricultural lands at Boys Town village. The corridor forest is disconnected
due to the steep edges that were cut into the mountain while constructing the
Palchuram road between Boys Town and Kottiyur. Elephants can now cross the
corridor only near a bridge located 500 metres from Boys Town junction.
Alternate Name Periya, Palchuram

State Kerala
Connectivity Periya Reserve Forest of Wayanad
Forest Division with Kottiyur Reserve
Forest of Kottiyur Wildlife Sanctuary
Length and Width 3 km and 0 – 0.15 km
75° 53’ 13”- 75° 55’ 15” E
Legal status Reserve Forests

Major land use Reserve forest, rubber estate, tea
garden, coffee estate, private lands,
agriculture, settlement
Major habitation/settlements Boys Town and Varaiyal
678 679
area, of which eight are palatable to elephants. Artocarpus hirsutus, Oroxylum
indicum, Alstonia scholaris and Terminalia paniculata were the dominant species
in the corridor forest. Terminalia paniculata, Myristica contorta, Grewia tiliifolia
and Mesua ferrea were important among the high girth class. Ground cover
comprised shrubs (36%), followed by herbs (33%) and grasses (31%).
Map of the Kottiyur – Periya Corridor showing the land to be secured

The South India synchronised elephant census conducted during 2010 in Kerala
shows an estimated mean density of 0.3116 and 0.1220 elephants per sq km in
North Wayanad Division and Kannur Forest Division respectively. The elephant
population of these two forest divisions indicates that a minimum of 121
elephants are extensively using this corridor.
Forest/Land use
Coffee and Rubber estates
Agriculture: Banana, coconut, pepper, vegetables, areca nut etc
Settlements: Boys Town and Varaiyal
Road: Mananthavady-Kannur state highway (Palchuram road)

Protected Area: Kottiyur Wildlife Sanctuary
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Vehicular traffic on the Palchuram-Mananthavady road: Heavy vehicles carrying
bricks ply regularly on this road, with a peak in the evening hours. Four-wheeled
680 681
vehicles also ply regularly, except at night, with their peak movement happening CONSERVATION PLAN
in the afternoons and evenings. The peak movement of two-wheelers happens
in the afternoons and about 8 o’clock at night. Overall, while traffic volume 1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and
lessens at night, it still hinders elephant movement since the peak movement of legally protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and
heavy vehicles coincides with that of elephants. developmental activities detrimental to animal movement.
3. Coffee estates: Two coffee estates are located inside the corridor at Varaiyal 2. Since the corridor area is of a very critical nature, part of it could be declared
and considerably reduce the width of the corridor. as Ecologically Fragile Land (EFL). A total of 48.2 acres of land has been identified
as Priority I to secure the corridor and increase its width at Boys Town village
4. Boys Town village: The village completely blocks the movement path of and Varaiyal.
elephants.
5. Solar fences erected by the forest department and estate owners in the Land identified to secure the corridor
corridor hinder animal movement.
Plot No. as marked in Extent of area (acres) Survey Number
Corridor villages: Boys Town is situated about 18 km from Mananthavady. There Map
are 12 households in this village, with a total of 65 individuals (28 male and 37 In Varaiyal village
female). The village comes under the Thavinjal Grama Panchayath, Periya Village 1 5.20 3023
and Mananthavady Taluk of Wayanad district. 2 1 3023
6.20
The village’s inhabitants have been facing problems with elephants and other In Boys Town village
wild animals for the past decade. A few of them cultivate coffee, areca nut, 3 12 5/1A
pepper, banana, vegetables, coconut etc. They are unable to earn an adequate 3 2.70 5/1A
living from agriculture, however, with up to 60% of their profits being lost due to 3 2.70 5/1A
crop depredation by elephants and other wildlife. Some of them work as daily 3 2.70 5/1A
wage labourers in the nearby coffee and rubber estates. 3 2.70 5/1A
3 2.70 5/1A
Corridor dependent villages: Periya, Pokkottu-Chapparam, Chanthanathodu, 4 12 5/1A
37th Mile and CRP Kunnu. 5 0.15 5/1B
5 0.45 5/1B
Human-Elephant Conflict: There has been an increasing trend of crop 5 1.50 5/1A
depredation by elephants over the years. From 2006 to 2011, ex-gratia support 5 1.90 5/1A
of Rs 119.5 lakh was paid by the forest department for crop damage and 5 0.05 5/1B
damage to property by elephants, at an average of about Rs 20 lakh per annum.
682 683
5 0.30 5/1B
5 0.10 5/1B
5 13.50 5/1A
6 1.50 5/1A
6 0.04 5/1B
6 1.10 5/1B
6 3.18 5/1A
6 1.50 5/1B
62.77

Fig. 8.13: Land identified for securing Kottiyur-Periya corridor

The Priority I land identified for securing the corridor from Boys Town village is
about 42 acres out of 62.77 acres.
684 685
8.17
Periya at Pakranthalam
This corridor connects the northern and southern portions of the Periya Reserve
Forest in Wayanad North Division. Elephants from Wayanad North Division move
to Kozhikode Forest Division through narrow and undulating forests between
3D map showing the landscape of the Periya at Pakranthalam Corridor

Periya and Pakranthalam villages. Forest connectivity has been cut off due to
the Mananthavady-Kuttiadi ghat road and a cell phone tower at the Kozhikode-
Mananthavady district border. Presently, elephants pass through the farmlands
and fallow estate lands in the area.
Alternate Name Pakranthalam

State Kerala
Connectivity Northern and southern portion of
Periya Reserve Forest
Length and Width 0.5 km and 0-0.3 km
75° 49’ 8”- 75° 49’ 55” E

Major land use Forest, estate, settlement
Major habitation/settlements Pakranthalam
Frequency of usage by elephants Seasonal
area, of which seven are palatable to elephants. Schleichera oleosa and Bischofia
javanica were the dominant tree species. Clutia retusa, Mesua ferra, Syzygium
lanceolaria, Lagerstroemia microcarpa and Dalbergia latifolia were important
among the high girth class.
686 687
Ground cover: Shrubs covered almost 40% of the ground, followed by grasses
(30%) and herbs (30%).

North Wayanad Forest Division: 33
Kozhikode Forest Division: 26
(Wild Elephant Census of Kerala State, 2010)
Forest/Land use
Map of the Periya at Pakranthalam Corridor showing the land to be secured

Forest: Tropical moist deciduous
Agriculture land and Coffee estates
Buildings/Artefacts: Cell phone tower, Private farm house
Road: Mananthavady-Pakranthalam state highway

HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. A cell phone tower is located on the Kozhikode-Manathavady district boundary
in the bottleneck of this corridor and has completely blocked elephant
movement.
2. Kozhikode-Mananthavady via Kuttiadi road: This is a ghat road that passes

through the corridor. Steep downward and upward slopes on both sides of the
road hinder elephant movement.
3. Traffic: A traffic intensity survey conducted on the Pakranthalam-

Mananthavady road revealed that 44 vehicles per hour ply through the corridor
on average. Vehicle movement was highest from 1 pm to 2 pm (60 vehicles),
688 689
followed by 2 pm to 5 pm (58 vehicles) and 5 pm to 6 pm (58 vehicles). Vehicle 2. Since the traditional corridor is almost blocked, the elephants are mostly
movement was high between 6 am and 8 pm (53 vehicles) compared to the passing through four plots of about 31.8 acres, owned by four individuals. These
night hours (31 vehicles between 8 pm and 6 am). As elephants mostly cross the need to be secured to restore the corridor. Coffee, arecanut, ginger, turmeric
road during the late evenings and nights, the threat from road traffic is as yet etc. are being cultivated in the three farmland plots here. The fourth plot of 13.5
manageable. acres in which a cell phone tower is located in the most vital part of the corridor.
4. Plantation: The corridor is blocked by a patch of private land which is partially

cultivated. Land identified to secure the corridor
5. A resort is under contruction within 200 metres of the corridor and just one Extent of area Status of the land
metre from the forest boundary. This will be a major obstruction to the free (acres)
movement of elephants and other wildlife. 13.50 Patta land

6.70 Patta land
Corridor villages: No settlements lie within the corridor. However, there are 8.6 Patta land
a few plantations with farm houses, where crops such as coffee, areca nut, 3 Patta land
ginger and turmeric are cultivated. The landowners are from upper middle-class
backgrounds and are financially stable.
A cell phone tower is also located on 13.50 acres of land with a degraded
agricultural field which falls within the corridor area. This area has been declared
as Ecologically Fragile Land (EFL).
Corridor dependent villages: Pakranthalam, Surani, Valanthode, Pannoth,

Niravilpuzha and Kunhome
Human – Elephant conflict: Crop damage by elephants is high in the corridor

area. No human or elephant death has been recorded due to conflict, though
one person was injured in an elephant-related incident in 2009.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and protected
under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and development activities
detrimental to animal movement.
690 691
8.18
Nilambur at Appankappu
This corridor connects the Nilambur and Vazhikadavu Ranges of Nilambur North
Forest Division. The corridor is located at the inter-state boundary of Tamil Nadu
3D map showing the landscape of the Nilambur at Appankappu Corridor

and Kerala. Elephants move from Wayanad South Forest Division to Gudalur
Forest Division, Tamil Nadu and Nilambur South Forest Division, Kerala through a
bottleneck forest patch between Appankappu Rubber Estate and Munderi village
in Nilambur North Forest Division.
Alternate Name Nilambur

State Kerala
Connectivity Nilambur North and Nilambur South
Division
76° 16’ 23”- 76° 17’ 58” E

Major land use Forest, agriculture and settlements
Major habitation/settlements Appankappu, Munderi
area, of which six were elephant food species. Maximum GBH was recorded in
Lagerstomia microcarpa (136 cm). The maximum height was observed in
L. microcarpa (30 m), Poovathi (25 m) and Kalpoovathi (12 m). There were
692 693
positive indicators of bamboo regeneration in the corridor, but signs of lopping

and wood cutting were seen on nearly all trees.
Ground cover: Grasses: 20%, shrubs: 25%, herbs: 20% and barren ground: 35%.

Nilambur North Division: 73 (elephant density: 0.2536 per sq km)
Nilambur South Division: 33 (elephant density: 0.1924 per sq km)
Map of the Nilambur at Appankappu Corridor showing the land to be secured

Forest/Land use
Settlements: Appankappu and Munderi
Buildings/Artefacts: Rubber estates
River: Nirpuzha

Elephant Reserve: Nilambur Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Rubber estates: Appankappu Rubber Estate considerably reduces the width of
the corridor, hindering the free movement of elephants.
2. Settlements: There is a major human settlement, Appankappu Colony (132

households) surrounded by a six-foot-high stone wall that extends for about two
kilometres. The inhabitants mainly depend on the corridor forest for NTFP.
Corridor villages: Apart from the families living in Appankappu Colony, there are
10 families living in Appankappu Rubber Estate. The estate owners and local
people here are not prepared to accept voluntary relocation to an alternate site.
694 695
Corridor dependent villages: Munderi, Appankappu
Community: Paliyar Tribals
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is on the rise in and around the corridor,

with 91 cases reported between 2009 and 2013. A total of Rs 3,00,898 was
disbursed as ex-gratia for losses due to crop depredation by elephants.
CONSERVATION PLAN
1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and protected
Fig. 8.14: A view of the Nilambur at Appankappu Corridor

under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and developmental activities
detrimental to animal movement.
2. In consultation with the villagers, corridor land in Appankappu Rubber Estate

could be secured.
3. Construction on either side of the corridor needs to be regulated.
Extent of area Status of the land

(acres)
3.5 Patta land
10.40 Patta land
2 Patta land
4 Patta land
40 Patta land
18 Patta land
696 697
8.19
Nilambur Kovilagam –
New Amarambalam
3D map showing the landscape of the Nilambur Kovilagam – New Amarambalam Corridor
This corridor connects the Nilambur Kovilagam Reserve Forest of Nilambur
North Division and the New Amarambalam Reserve Forest of Nilambur South
Division. The corridor links to Wayanad South Division in the northwest and to
Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve and Nilambur South Division in the south, and further
on to Silent Valley and Mukurthi National Parks. The corridor is situated on the
Gudalur-Nilambur road, with a stretch of forest on both sides of the road. The
slopes are very steep and elephants can cross only at four points.
Alternate Name Vazhikadavu

State Kerala
Connectivity Nilambur North Division to Nilambur
South Division
76° 17’ 23”- 76° 23’ 51” E

area. Of these, 11 species are palatable to elephants. Anogeissus latifolia,
Terminalia paniculata, Xylia xylocarpa, Alstonia scholaris and Tectona grandis were
698 699
the dominant species. Fruiting and shade bearing trees were very limited. There
was no salt lick found near the corridor area. The Karakodu and Punjakolly Rivers
provide water throughout the year for elephants.
Ground cover: Shrubs (37%) and grasses (37%) were found in equal proportion,
followed by herbs (26%). In spite of cattle grazing from nearby villages, the grass
cover was good.

Nilambur North Division: 73 (elephant density of 0.2536 per sq km)
Map of the Nilambur Kovilagam – New Amarambalam Corridor

Nilambur South Division: 33 (elephant density of 0.1924 per sq km)
Forest/Land use
Road: Nilambur-Gudalur road

Elephant Reserve: Nilambur Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Gudalur-Nilambur road: The state highway connecting Ooty with Kozhikode

city passes through the corridor. Steep edges on both sides of the road allow
elephants to cross only at four points.
2. Biotic pressure: Villages in and around the corridor depend on the corridor
forest for NTFP and fuelwood collection, and cattle grazing.
700 701
3. Plantations in nearby forest areas have electric fences installed, narrowing It is therefore essential that traffic be regulated in the morning and evening
the available movement path for elephants and other wild animals. The PCK hours. The slopes in these four places could be levelled if possible to facilitate
plantation which is spread over 345 ha significantly affects elephant movement elephant movement.
in the lowland forests.
4. Vehicular traffic: Traffic intensity on the Gudalur-Nilambur road is high between

5 am and 7 am (350 vehicles) and again in the evening between 6 pm and 11 pm
(334 vehicles). Mostly four- and six-wheel vehicles were recorded in the corridor
during these times. The peak hours for vehicular movement coincide with the
times when elephants are most active. With vehicles plying at high speeds, the
movement of elephants is significantly hindered.
Corridor dependent villages: Vazhikadavu, Punjakolli, Anamari and Karakkodu
Human-Elephant Conflict: Incidents of human death, injury and crop damage

were reported in the corridor dependent villages. That conflict is on the rise is
revealed by the ex-gratia disbursement records of the forest department, as well
as through discussions with the villagers.
Two people were killed by elephants in the Vazhikkadavu Range in 2008-09.
CONSERVATION PLAN

legally protected under an appropriate law to prevent encroachment and Fog. 8.15: A view of the Nilambur Kovilagam – New Amarambalam Corridor
development activities detrimental to animal movement.
2. The Vazhikadavu and Nadukani ghat road has steep slopes on either side,
allowing elephants to cross at only four places. Even in these four places,
elephants cannot cross the road right away: once they reach the road they
have to walk along it for about 20-80 metres to find the suitable exit point.
702 703
8.20
Mudumalai – Nilambur via O’ Valley
Located on the inter-state boundary of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, this corridor
3D map showing the landscape of the Mudumalai – Nilambur via O’ Valley Corridor
connects Nilambur North Forest Division in Kerala with Nilgiri North Division,
Gudalur Forest Division and Mudumalai Tiger Reserve in Tamil Nadu. Elephants
move from Nilambur North Division to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve and Bandipur
Tiger Reserve through fragmented forest patches, tea/coffee/clove/cardamom
estates, and human habitations in Gudalur Forest Division via O’ Valley.
Alternate name Mudumalai-Nilambur

State Tamil Nadu, Kerala
Connectivity Mudumalai Tiger Reserve with
Nilambur North Forest Division
Length and Width 35 km and 0- 1 km
Geographical coordinates 76 31’ 47.725” E, 11 32’ 53.874”N
76 24’ 34.841” E, 11 25’ 30.235”N

Major land use Tea, coffee and cardamom
plantations, settlements
Major habitation/settlements 26 human settlements
Forest type Dry deciduous and shola forest

Gudalur Forest Division: 112
704 705
(Synchronised Elephant Census, Tamil Nadu, 2012)

Nilambur North Forest Division: 195 elephants
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Dry deciduous and shola forest
Plantations: Coffee, cardamom, tea
Settlements: Gudalur and surrounding villages
Highway: National Highway 67 (Ooty-Bengaluru)
Map of the Mudumalai – Nilambur via O’ Valley Corridor

Protected Area: Mudumalai Tiger reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Human settlements: About 26 settlements are located in the corridor, causing
biotic pressure and physically obstructing elephant movement.
2. Plantations: Several tea, coffee and cardamom estates are located all along
the corridor. Some of these are protected by electric fences, which significantly
affect the free movement of elephants (for instance, the electric fence in Balmadi
Estate.)
3. Vehicular traffic: NH 67 connecting Ooty and Bengaluru passes through the

corridor. On average, 113.5 vehicles per hour were recorded around the clock
on this highway. The movement of four-wheelers was highest (75 per hour),
followed by six-wheelers (24 per hour). The frequency of heavy vehicles (three
per hour) seemed to be very low. Movement of four-wheelers was very high
between 1 pm and 10 pm.
706 707
Corridor Villages: About 26 villages/settlements/estate labour quarters with Human-Elephant Conflict: The trend of human-elephant conflict in and around
approximately 2000 households are located along the corridor. Most of the the corridor between 2001 and 2013 revealed a high number of human deaths
people here are wage labourers in the nearby tea and coffee estates. They (n=31). About 47 cases of human injury due to elephants were recorded during
depend on the corridor forest patches for fuelwood and cattle grazing. the same period.
S.no Name of the settlement / village Households Population The nature of this landscape, with the corridor being located in a mosaic of
1 Silver Cloud Labour Quarters 86 400 forest patches, tea/coffee/clove/cardamom estates and human habitations, is
2 27 Mail
th
52 227 the major cause for elevated human-elephant conflict in this region.
3 Gudalur Mali Labour Quarters 42 2
4 Vatta Parai 25 70
CONSERVATION PLAN
5 Number 4 60 300
6 Number 5 16 40
7 Number 6 15 40
8 Gandhinagar 350 700
9 Bulmadi Labour Quarters 15 -
10 Guind Labour Quarters 65 300
2. Electric fences obstructing elephant movement should be removed.
11 Kelly 70 400
12 New Hope Labour Quarters 42 200
13 Glenvence Labour Quarters 175 500
14 Mulakadu 212 300
15 Pulikundha 40 -
16 Number 1 80 250
17 Number 2 100 300
18 Number 3 50 100
19 Number 4 180 200
20 Number 6 10 -
21 Indira Magar 100 250
22 Ambulimala 20 10
23 Santhi Estate Labour Quarters 10 2
24 Sathiya Kumari Estate Labour 20 30
Quarters
25 Manga Maram 10 30
26 Line Kadu 30 60
708 709
8.21
Jaccanaire Slope - Hulikal Durgam
The corridor connects the Jaccanaire Slope Reserve Forest and Hulikal Durgam
Reserve Forest of Coimabatore Forest Division. Elephants from Sathyamangalam
3D map showing the landscape of the Jaccanaire Slope - Hulikal Durgam Corridor
Tiger Reserve move to the southern part of Coimbatore Forest Division through
the foothills of highly undulating mountains and cross the corridor between
the second hairpin bend of the Mettupalayam-Coonoor highway and Kallar
village. The corridor is very narrow due to plantations and various development
activities.
Alternate name Kallar, Kallar at Ghandhapallam

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve and
Coimbatore Forest Division
76° 50’ 52”- 76° 54’ 12” E
Legal status Reserve Forest, Private Forest, Private

Land
Major land use Forests, private plantations and
settlements
Major habitation/settlements Kallar and Kallar Pudur
Forest type Tropical thorn and dry deciduous
forests
area of 0.3 ha. Of these, 16 are elephant food species. The maximum average
GBH was observed in Ficus benghalensis (145 cm), followed by Azadiracta indica
710 711
(85 cm) and Acacia nilotica (82 cm). Maximum average height was recorded in
Bamboo sp (22 m), followed by Acacia nilotica (15 m) and Albizzia amara (12 m).
Signs of lopping and wood cutting were seen on almost all tree species. The
ground cover comprised shrubs (8%), grasses (2%), herbs (10%) and barren
ground (80%).

Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve: 877
Map of the Jaccanaire Slope - Hulikal Durgam Corridor

Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical thorn and dry deciduous forests
Buildings/Artefacts: Swami Sachidhanandha Jothi Niketan
Settlements: Nellithurai, Nandhavana Pudur, Kallar and Kallar Pudur
Agricultural land & plantations: Banana, areca nut and coconut
Road: National Highway 67 (Mettupalayam-Ooty)

Elephant Reserve: Coimbatore Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. The Swami Sachidhanandha Jothi Niketan occupies a vast area adjacent to the
corridor. Its boundary is protected by a solar fence.
2. Black Thunder (Water Theme Park): Indiscriminate construction around the

theme park has increased human occupancy and biotic pressure on the
corridor areas.
712 713
3. Kallar Pudur (an encroachment near Swami Sachidhanandha Jothi Niketan): CONSERVATION PLAN
The huts here have been gradually been replaced by concrete buildings. The
area now also has streetlights. 1. The corridor should be legally protected by the state forest department under
an appropriate law to prevent encroachment, diversion of forest land for non-
4. Kallar village has expanded on the northern side of Kallar railway station. forestry activities, and development activities that hinder animal movement.
5. Areca nut, banana and coconut plantations are hindering elephant movement 2. In consultation with villagers, 92.05 acres (59.9 acres as Priority I and 32.15
through the corridor. acres as Priority II) of land in Kallar village, Kallar Pudur (including a forest
nursery) and Barliyar village could be secured and conserved with the active
6. Unscientifically designed electric fences have been erected in the area in the last participation of local communities and the district administration.
few years, posing a threat to elephants.
3. No development activities should be permitted on either side of National
7. Heavy traffic on the Mettupalayam-Coonoor and Mettupalayam-Kotagiri Highway 67 (between the forest checkpost and the first hairpin) in the corridor
highways. An average of 285 vehicles per hour was recorded on the area.
Mettupalayam-Coonoor highway, with peak traffic between 12 noon and 4 pm.
Vehicle movement was low at night and in the early morning hours (1 am to 4. An overpass is needed for vehicles on NH 67, from Kallar bridge to the second
5 am). The high traffic volume, especially during the dry season, is a serious hairpin. The use of pre-fabricated structures would minimise the adverse effects
impediment to elephant movement. of construction. Till the overpass is constructed, vehicular movement on NH 67
should be regulated, especially during the peak elephant movement season.
8. Government Horticultural Garden: Located in the bottleneck of the corridor, this
has blocked elephant movement to a significant extent. 5. Roadside restaurants in Barliyar are dumping waste material in forest areas.
These dumping sites attract elephants and deer and require the enforcement of
Corridor dependent villages: Nellithurai, Nandhavanapudur, Kallar and Kallar proper garbage management practices.
Pudur
Human-Elephant Conflict: Development activities increased in the area around
1997, leading to a rise in conflict. Fifteen human deaths due to elephants and Extent of area Status of the land Priority
nine elephant deaths due to electrocution were reported between 1994 and (acres)
2007. 21.9 Patta land P1
16.85 Patta land P1
7.65 Patta land, owned by four P1
families
714 715
7.9 Patta land, owned by 47 P1

different owners
5.6 Patta land, owned by four P1
tribal families
20.15 Patta land P2
12 Leased to the horticulture P2
department
Fig. 8.16: Ghat road passing through the Jaccanaire Slope - Hulikal Durgam Corridor
92.05 acres
59.9 acres as Priority 1 and 32.15 acres as Priority 2
716 717
8.22
Anaikatti North – Anaikatti South
This corridor connects Anaikatti North Reserve Forest and Anaikatti South
Reserve Forest of Coimbatore Forest Division. Elephants from Sathyamangalam
3D map showing the landscape of the Anaikatti North - Anaikatti South Corridor
Tiger Reserve move to Mannarkad Forest Division, Kerala through the foothills of
highly undulating mountains in the upper plateau of Coimbatore Forest Division,
and cross the corridor near the villages of Panapalli, Kondanur Pudur, Kuttupuli
and Anaikatti.
Alternate name Anaikatti, Boluvampatti-Attapadi

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Boluvampatti Reserve Forest with
Attapadi Reserve Forest
Length and Width 9 km and 0.15-1 km
76° 46’ 30”- 76° 48’ 59” E

Major land use Forest, agriculture, settlements,
Institutions
area of 0.03 ha. Of these, 18 are elephant food species. The maximum average
GBH was recorded in Acacia planifirons (142 cm), followed by Dichrostachys
cinerea (112 cm) and Zyziphus mauritiona (107 cm). Maximum average height was
recorded in Azadiracta indica (25 m), followed by Dichrostachys cinerea (22 m) and
718 719
Anogessius latifolia (18 m). The ground cover was represented by shrubs (20%),
grasses (20%) and herbs (20%), with the remainder being barren ground (40%).

Forest/Land use
Revenue land
Buildings/Artefacts: Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON),
Map of the Anaikatti North - Anaikatti South Corridor

Karl Kubel Institute, PSG Institution and Swami Dayanand Saraswati Ashram
Human settlements: Sembukarai, Kandivalli, Dhoomanur, Panapalli, Jambukandi,
Veerapandi Pudur, Kondanur, Mel Baavi, Pudur, Kil Baavi
Agriculture land
Road: Coimbatore-Anaikatti state highway

Elephant Reserve: Coimbatore Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. The Swami Dayanand Saraswati Ashram occupies a vast area adjacent to the
corridor. A solar power fence marks the ashram’s boundary, with only a narrow
passage available for elephant’s to move through.
2. The Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History occupies a vast area
adjacent to the corridor and is also well protected by solar power fences, which
hinder elephant movement.
720 721
3. Karl Kubel Institute: Again, occupies a large area adjacent to the corridor and is CONSERVATION PLAN
protected by solar fences. The staff quarters and powerful lights in the compound
are psychological barriers to elephants, preventing free movement. 1. The corridor should be notified by the state forest department and legally
4. Avila Teacher Training Institute (Proposed): Also occupies a large area adjacent to activities detrimental to animal movement.
the corridor, and is protected by solar fences. Construction has not been permitted
by the district administration as per the Hill Area Conservation Authority (HACA), 2. In consultation with the villagers and the state government, about 25.7 acres of
but this could be a potential threat. patta land should be secured on a priority basis.
5. PSG institution has started a new construction; the area is completely protected Revenue land measuring 48.94 acres could also be notified and secured in
by an electric fence. consultation with the district administration. Further, in consultation with SACON,
the unused land with the institute could also be secured for elephant movement.
6. Coimbatore Zoological Park (Proposed): A zoological park has been proposed on
the southwest side of this corridor. A large area has been purchased and could be 3. Traffic on the state highway should be regulated between 9 pm and 5 am.
a potential threat to the corridor.
4. No developmental activities should be allowed on either side of the highway
7. Vehicular traffic: Medium-sized vehicles such as jeeps and cars extensively use passing through the corridor.
the Coimbatore-Anaikatti State Highway even at night. Some 92 vehicles per hour
pass through the corridor as per a survey conducted in 2014-15. Land identified to secure the corridor
About 25.7 acres of patta land to be secured on a priority basis. About 48.9 acres
Corridor villages: Kandivalli, Kondanur Pudur, Panapalli and Moongilpallam are are directly controlled by the district administration and could be secured in
located in and around the corridor area. consultation with the government.
Corridor dependent villages: Sembukarai, Kandivalli, Dhoomanur, Panapalli, Land ownership Extent of Status of the land
Jambukandi, Veerapandi Pudur, Kondanur, Mel Baavi, Pudur, Kil Baavi. area (Acres)
Priority I
Human-Elephant Conflict: Data on human-elephant conflict between 1993 and Private 18 Patta land
2014 reveals that human deaths due to elephants mostly began occuring after Private 2.76 Patta Land
2004. A lot of construction happened near the corridor area from 1995 onwards,
Private 4.95 Patta Land (Near
causing conflict to escalate. No human deaths were reported from the Coimbatore
SACON)
Forest Division between 1993 and 1998, but 99 human deaths due to elephants
Priority II
were reported from 1999 to 2014. These incidences have further increased since
2010.
722 723
Government Land 32.84 Panapalli Revenue

Land (Porambokku)
Land (Porambokku)
Land (Porambokku)
Land (Porambokku)
Fig. 8.17: A view of tthe Anaikatti North - Anaikatti South Corridor

Land (Porambokku)
Land (Porambokku)
Barren Land 1.0 Cart road,
Government Land

724 725
8.23
Anaimalai at Punachi
The Anaimalai at Punachi corridor connects Punachi Reserve Forest and

Anaimalai Reserve Forest within Anaimalai Tiger Reserve. Elephants from
Anaimalai Tiger Reserve move to Parambikulam Tiger Reserve through highly
3D map showing the landscape of the Anaimalai at Punachi Corridor

undulating forests between the villages of Attakatti, Kilpunachi and Upper Aliyar.
Alternate name Attakatti-Upper Aliyar

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Punachi Reserve Forest with Anaimalai
Reserve Forest of Anaimalai Tiger
Reserve
76° 58’ 34”- 77° 0’ 46” E
Legal status Tiger Reserve and Patta Land

area. Of these,12 were elephant food species. The maximum average GBH was
observed in Syzygium cumini (300 cm), followed by Olea dioica (225 cm) and
Albizzia lebbeck (220 cm). Maximum average height was recorded in Olea dioica
(18 m), followed by Anogeissus latifolia (15 m) and Grewia tillifolia (14 m). The
ground cover comprised grasses (60%), herbs (10%) and shrubs (15%), with the
remainder as barren ground (15%).
726 727

Anaimalai Tiger Reserve: 584
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve: 331
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical moist deciduous forest
Road: Pollachi-Valparai State Highway (SH 78)
Settlement: Kilpunachi
Map of the Anaimalai at Punachi Corridor

Elephant Range: Anaimalai-Nelliampathy-High Range Landscape
Elephant Reserve: Anaimalai Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Anaimalai Tiger Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Highway: The expansion of State Highway 78 and the construction of a wall
along it will hinder elephant movement. The number of vehicles passing through
the corridor is very high, especially during elephant migratory season. Tourists
stop their vehicles all along the corridor for refreshments.
Corridor villages: Although Kilpunachi village is located in the corridor, human-

elephant conflict is minimal, in keeping with the lack of agricultural activity in the
corridor area.
Corridor dependent villages: Attakatti and Upper Aliyar villages, and Punachi
forest settlement.
728 729
Human-Elephant Conflict: There is no record of human death caused by

elephants in this corridor in recent years. This is mainly because local villagers
do not use the Kadamparai and Aliyar-Valparai road in late evenings and early
mornings. There are also very few plantations in the area, with most starting a
kilometre away from the corridor. There is an abandoned coffee estate nearby.
CONSERVATION PLAN
developmental activities hindering elephant movement.
Fig. 8.18: Anaimalai at Punachi corridor

2. Vehicular speed should be regulated on the Valparai ghat road and visitors
prevented from stopping. Suitable signages could also be placed to create
awareness about the corridor and its importance.
730 731
8.24
Anaimalai at Waterfalls Estate
This corridor links the habitats of the Valparai and Pollachi Ranges of Anaimalai
Tiger Reserve. Elephants from Anaimalai Tiger Reserve move to Parambikulam
Tiger Reserve through a narrow reserve forest between Waterfalls and Mount
3D map showing the landscape of the Anaimalai at Waterfalls Estate Corridor

Stuart Estates.
Alternate name Ayerpadi-Waterfalls Estate

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity West to East of Anaimalai Tiger
Reserve
76° 57’ 42”- 77° 0’ 31” E
Legal status Tiger Reserve and Forest Leased Land

Major land use Forest and tea gardens
area, of which three are palatable to elephants. The maximum average GBH was
recorded in Cullenia exarillata (255 cm), followed by Syzygium cumini (185 cm).
Maximum average height was seen in Wrightia tinctoria and Listea wightiana (25
m), followed by Syzygium cumini (20 m). Ground cover comprised shrubs (30%),
grasses (15%) and herbs (15%), with the rest as barren ground (40%).
732 733

Parambikulam Tiger Reserve: 331
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical moist deciduous forest
Map of the Anaimalai at Waterfalls Estate Corridor showing the land to be secured
Tea Estates: Waterfalls, Mount Stuart and Waverly Estates
Road: State Highway 78 (Pollachi-Valparai)

HUMAN DIMENSION
Threats
1. Uncontrolled tourism is a major problem along this corridor with visitors
stopping to see animals. This not only disturbs wildlife movement but at times
leads to conflict.
2. Biotic pressure from the labour colonies of Waterfalls Estate and Mount Stuart
Estate are a threat to the corridor forest.
3. Vehicular traffic is high between 10 pm and 5 pm on SH 78. On an average 50

vehicles per hour ply on this road. People also stop on the way to view wildlife.
Vehicle movement was found to be low in the early mornings and late evenings
(after 6 pm) as mist covers the area and visibility becomes poor.
734 735
Corridor villages: No villages are located inside the corridor. The corridor is,
however, surrounded by three large tea estates: Waverly Estate, NEPC (Mount
Stuart Estate) and Waterfalls Estate. The labour colonies of these estates depend
on the corridor forest for fuelwood collection.
Corridor dependent villages: Waterfalls Estate and Mount Stuart Estate labour
colonies.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Conflict is a major problem in the area. Thirteen
Fig. 8.19: A road passing through the Anaimalai at Waterfalls Estate Corridor
human deaths and 18 elephant deaths due to conflict were reported in
Anaimalai Tiger Reserve between 2001 and 2012. The intensity of both human
deaths and property damage caused by elephants increases between August
and February each year.
CONSERVATION PLAN
an appropriate law, and action should be taken to prevent encroachment of
forest land, illicit felling of trees and development activities detrimental to the
corridor.
2. In consultation with the Waterfalls Estate ownership, 24 acres of land on the

southern side of the estate needs to be secured.
3. The expansion of tea estates, human settlements and encroachments along

Waterfalls Estate should be prevented.
4. Vehicular speeds should be regulated through suitable barriers in the stretch

of Valparai-Pollachi State Highway that passes through the corridor.

This corridor is very narrow on the eastern side of the Pollachi-Valparai state
highway, between Mount Stuart and Waterfalls Estates. At least 24 acres of land
located on the southern side of Waterfalls Estate could be secured to increase
the corridor’s width.
736 737
8.25
Anaimalai between Siluvaimedu –
Kadamparai
3D map showing the landscape of the Anaimalai between Siluvaimedu – Kadamparai Corridor
This corridor connects the habitats of the Valparai and Manambolly Ranges
of Anaimalai Tiger Reserve. Elephants from Anaimalai Tiger Reserve move to
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve through highly undulating and narrow forests
between Mount Stuart Estate and Iyerpadi Estate.
Alternate name Siluvaimedu-Kadamparai

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity West to East of Anaimalai Tiger
Reserve
76° 56’ 15”- 77° 0’ 14” E
Legal status Tiger Reserve

Major habitation/settlements Kavarukal
area, of which three are elephant food species. The maximum average GBH
was recorded in Cullenia exarillata (250 cm), followed by Syzygium cumini (185
cm), and maximum average height in Litsea wightiana (23 m). Ground cover
comprised shrubs (20%), grasses (10%), herbs (20%) and barren ground (50%).
738 739

Parambikulam Wildlife Sanctuary: 331
Forest/Land use
Forest: Tropical moist deciduous forest
Tea Estates: Mount Stuart Estate, Velloni Estate, Talanar Estate and
Varattuparai Estate
Map of the Anaimalai between Siluvaimedu-Kadamparai Corridor

Road: State Highway 78 (Pollachi-Valparai)

Mountain Range: Southern Western Ghats
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Biotic Pressure: Kavarukal estate settlement, Siluvaimedu and Kadamparai
on the fringe depend on the corridor forest for fuelwood collection and cattle
grazing, posing a major threat to the corridor habitat.
2. Developmental activities: Uncontrolled tourism and the clearing of the

remaining evergreen forest patches located inside tea plantations are degrading
the habitat
3. Traffic intensity is very high along the state highway from 9 am to 5 pm.
740 741
Corridor Villages: The corridor has Nadumkundru village at its fringe and this is
not a hindrance to elephant movement.
Corridor dependent villages: Kadamparai, Kavarukal Estate settlements and

Iyerpadi Estate settlements.
Human – Elephant conflict: Conflict is a major problem in Anaimalai. The

intensity of both human deaths and property damage caused by elephants
increases between August and February each year.
CONSERVATION PLAN
appropriate law to prevent encroachment of the river bank, diversion of forest
land for non-forestry activities, and other developmental activities in the corridor
area. Fig. 8.20: Signage in the corridor area
2. Vehicular speed on the state highway passing through the corridor should be
regulated by suitable physical barriers.
3. Village committees need to be strengthened for better protection and

conservation of the corridor.
Fig. 8.21: A view of the Anaimalai between Siluvaimedu-Kadamparai Corridor
742 743
8.26
Vazhachal – Anaimalai via
Sholayar
3D map showing the landscape of the Vazhachal – Anaimalai via Sholayar corridor
This corridor connects the Valparai and Manambolly Ranges of Anaimalai Tiger
Reserve, Tamil Nadu with Malayattur Forest Division, Kerala. It is located on the
inter-state boundary of Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Elephants from the Malayattur
and Vazhachal Forest Divisions in Kerala move to Anaimalai Tiger Reserve
through TATA Coffee Ltd at Pachhamalai, Sirikundra Tea Estates India Ltd, Periya
Karamalai Tea Company, Parry Agro Industries Ltd at Iyerpadi, and Pannimed,
Murugan, Korangumudi, Injipara, Sholayar, Kallar, Vellamalai and Nadumalai
villages on the Valparai plateau in Tamil Nadu.
Alternate name Karumalai-Sholayar

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Valparai Range and Manambolly
Range of Anaimalai Tiger Reserve,
Tamil Nadu with Malayattur Forest
Division, Kerala
Geographical coordinates 10 °21’24.498” N - 10°16’10.465” N
77°1’58.72” E - 76°51’ 15.877” E
Legal status Anaimalai Tiger Reserve and Private

Tea Estates
Major land use Tea estates, settlements, forest
Major habitation/settlements Valparai and Iyerpadi
Forest type Moist evergreen forest
744 745
area. Of these, four are elephant food species. The maximum average GBH was
recorded in Canthium dicoccum (230 cm), followed by Salix tetrasperma (210
cm) and Manikara hexandra (185 cm). Maximum average height was noticed in
Haldina cordifolia (25 m) and Cullenia exarillata (15 m). Ground cover vegetation
was dominated by herbs (25%), grasses (15%) and shrubs (15%), with the
Map of the Vazhachal – Anaimalai via Sholayar Corridor

Parambikulam Wildlife Sanctuary: 331
Vazhachal Division: 574
Malayattur Division: 404
Munnar Wildlife Division: 529
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Moist evergreen forest
Estates: TATA Coffee Ltd at Pachhamalai, Sirikundra Tea Estates India Ltd, Periya
Karamalai Tea Company, Parry Agro Industries Ltd at Iyerpadi
River: Nadumalai aaru

746 747
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Settlements: A large number of villages as well as the labour lines of tea and
coffee estates hinder elephant movement.
2. Plantations: A large part of the corridor area comprises tea and coffee
plantations along with their labour lines and factories.
Fig. 8.22: A view of the Vazhachal – Anaimalai via Sholayar Corridor

3. Vehicular traffic: This corridor has numerous estate roads, especially
Karumalai-Balaji Temple and Valparai-Sholayar Dam, which have heavy traffic
Corridor dependent villages: Iyerpadi, Kavarukal, Puthothottam and Valparai

Town
CONSERVATION PLAN
2. No construction should be allowed on either side of the roads passing

3. An awareness programme targeting the villagers living both within and on

the fringes of the corridor should be initiated through schools and community
organisations, informing them about the criticality of the corridor and how
the increased human-elephant conflict in the area has been caused by the
obstruction of the corridor.
4. A concerted effort needs to be made towards mitigating human-elephant

conflict in the region.
748 749
8.27
Vazhachal - Anaimalai via Ryan
This corridor connects the Valparai and Manambolly Ranges of Anaimalai Tiger
3D map showing the landscape of the Vazhachal - Anaimalai via Ryan Corridor
Reserve, Tamil Nadu with Malayattur Forest Division, Kerala. It is located on the
inter-state boundary of Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Elephants move from Malayattur
Forest Division and Vazhachal Forest Division in Kerala to Anaimalai Tiger
Reserve through the Ryan division of TANTEA (the Tamil Nadu Tea Plantation
Corporation Ltd) and eight to ten fragmented rainforest patches.
Alternate name Ryan Corridor

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Anaimalai Tiger Reserve to Vazhachal
Forest Division
Geographical coordinates 10° 21’ 13.414” N, 10°13’57.463”
77°1’25.469” E- 76°54’16.907” E

Major land use Tea estates and settlements
Major habitation/settlements Sankarankudi, Sundarankudi, Periya
Kallar, Lower and Upper Nirar Colony.
Forest type Evergreen forest
area. Of these, five were elephant food species. Maximum average GBH was
recorded in Canthium diococcum (230 cm), Salix tetrasperma (210 cm) and
Cullenia exarillata (150 cm). Maximum average height was noticed in Haldina
750 751
cordifolia (22 m) and Strychnos potatorum (20 m). Ground cover vegetation was
dominated by shrubs (25%), followed by grasses (20%), and herbs (15%), with the

Vazhachal Division: 574; Malayattur Division: 404; Munnar Division: 529
Forest/Land use
Map of the Vazhachal - Anaimalai via Ryan Corridor

Forest type: Evergreen forest
Tea estate: TANTEA: Lawson and Ryan divisions
Road: Pollachi-Valparai state highway
Settlements: Paraman Kadavu, Sankaran Kudi, Sundaran Kudi, Kallar Kudi, Lower
Nirar Colony, Upper Nirar colony and Periya Kallar
River: Poovar and Kallar

Elephant Reserve Name: Anaimalai Elephant Reserve
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Tea estates: The Ryan and Lawson divisions of TANTEA completely interrupt the
corridor connectivity.
2. Human settlements: Tribal settlements and tea estate labour colonies are
located inside the corridor areas, posing a severe threat.
752 753
3. Vehicular traffic: Vehicular traffic on the state highway passing through the
corridor hinders the free movement of elephants.
Corridor dependent villages: Paraman Kadavu, Sankaran Kudi, Sundaran Kudi,

Kallar Kudi, Lower Nirar Colony, Upper Nirar Colony and Periya Kallar.
Human-Elephant Conflict: Ryan division has been a hotbed of human-elephant

conflict with 25% of human deaths (nine of 36 people killed by elephants
between 1994 and 2011) in the Valparai Plateau occurring in an area occupying
Fig. 8.23: A settlement in the Vazhachal - Anaimalai via Ryan Corridor

less than 2% of the Valparai plantation landscape. Damage to property is also
common and local people face immense difficulties due to the remoteness of
their fields and housing.
CONSERVATION PLAN

2. No more labour colonies, tea factories and other development activities

should be allowed in the corridor.
3. Land use change should be strictly prohibited in the corridor area, especially
between the fragmented forest patches.
754 755
8.28
Srivilliputhur - Saptur
This corridor connects Saptur Reserve Forest with Srivilliputhur Reserve Forest
of the Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Sanctuary. Elephants move through narrow
forest foothills of steep mountains between Pilavikkal reservoir and Varushanad
3D map showing the landscape of the Srivilliputhur - Saptur Corridor

reserved land in the Watrap Range. The corridor is bounded on the north
by Madurai Forest Division, the southwest by Periyar Tiger Reserve and the
northwest by Meghamalai Wildlife Sanctuary.
Alternate name Pilavikkal-Watrap

State Tamil Nadu
Connectivity Saptur Reserve Forest with Srivilliputhur
Reserve Forest of Srivilliputhur Grizzled
Squirrel Sanctuary
77° 30’ 39”- 77° 32’ 14” E

Forest type Tropical thorn and deciduous forests
Frequency of usage by elephants Regular (November to January)
Corridor habitat status: Fourteen plant species were recorded in the sampled
area, of which 12 are elephant food species. Maximum average GBH and height
was recorded in Albizzia amara (GBH: 179 cm; H: 15 m) and Sterculia guttata
(GBH: 150 cm; H: 25 m). Ground cover was dominated by grasses (25%), herbs
(15%) and shrubs (10%), with the remainder as barren ground (50%).
756 757

Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Sanctuary: 156 (2002 census)
Forest/Land use
Forest type: Tropical thorn and deciduous forests
Roads: Kizhavankovil-Kovilar Dam
Dam: Pilavikkal Dam and Kovilar Dam
Map of the Srivilliputhur - Saptur Corridor showing the land to be secured

Elephant Range: Periyar-Agasthyamalai Landscape
Elephant Reserve: Srivilliputhur Elephant Reserve
Protected Area: Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Sanctuary
IBA: IN-TN-23, Criteria. A1, A2
HUMAN DIMENSIONS
Threats
1. Biotic pressure: Cattle grazing and illegal extraction of wood from the
corridor forest by the adjoining villages of Venobhava Nagar, Indira Nagar and
Kizhavankovil has affected the corridor habitat quality and diurnal movement of
elephants.
2. Human disturbance: Tourists and locals visiting the Kovilar Dam pollute the
corridor forest by throwing bottles, plastic and food waste which is a threat to
elephants.
Corridor dependent villages: Kizhavankovil, Venobhava Nagar and Indira Nagar

(Silk Farm)
Human-Elephant Conflict: With agriculture being limited there is very little

conflict in the corridor area. Only a few lands have coconut, mango and silk
plantations. A few instances of crop damage by elephants were reported during
2008-2013.
758 759
CONSERVATION PLAN

2. About 187 acres of land need to be secured to increase the width of the
corridor from 200 m to 300 m.
3. Regulated tourism could be conducted and the revenue earned could be

used to supplement the livelihood of fringe villagers.
Fig. 8.24: A view of the Srivilliputhur - Saptur Corridor

Village Name Name of the Extent of area Status of the

landowner (acres) land
Venobhava Nagari Chinnamuthu 6 Patta

Kamatchi Patta
Velandi Patta
Sellaiya Patta
Kizhavan Kovil Siva suriya 25 Patta
Prakash
Kizhavan Kovil 65 Patta
Kizhavan Kovil Ramanathan 10 Patta
Kizhavan Kovil Prabhu 50 Patta
Kizhavan Kovil Muthumalai 20 Patta
Kizhavan Kovil Bava Rawuthar 11 Patta
760 761
09 THE SURVIVAL OF WIDE-RANGING AND LARGE

NOMADIC MAMMALS LIKE ASIAN ELEPHANTS in
fragmented and human dominated landscape is a
Elephant corridors of India: major challenge. Of the available forest cover of 697,898
sq km in India (FSI 2015), only about 110,000 sq km (or
An Analysis 15.75%) is available to elephants. Of this, about 65,000
Vivek Menon and Sandeep Kr Tiwari sq km (59.1%) is notified as Elephant Reserves. Only
about 27% of Elephant Reserves are legally protected
under the Protected Area network.
A large extent of elephant habitat is thus outside the

purview of legal protection and much of it is not free of
human habitation and its disturbances. Many elephant
habitats are connected by narrow forest patches
and in several other cases, elephants pass through
agriculture lands, plantations and human settlements
to move between habitats, leading to increased
After extensive research and field surveys, 88 elephant

corridors were identified across India in 2005. However,
in the last one decade, there have been further
changes in the landscape; the expanding economy
and the heightened pace of development have further
impacted elephant habitats and corridors. Hence,
the existing corridors and new ones that may have
emerged in the last decade were visited and surveyed
to understand their current status and to prepare
conservation plans for securing each of them.
A total of 101 elephant corridors have now been

identified in the country (Figure 9.01) and seven
corridors that were identified earlier in 2005 have been
1 763
found impaired in the last decade due to developmental activities and land
16
use changes. Of the identified corridors, 15 (14.85%) are inter-state corridors.
A detailed methodology is given in the chapter ‘Documenting and Securing
Corridors’ in this publication, based on which this analysis is presented.
14
Of the identified corridors, 36.6% of the corridors are in North-eastern India
and Northern West Bengal and 27.7% in Southern India (Figure 9.02). There
is an inverse relationship between forest cover available in elephant ranging
12
states and the number of corridors in each state (Figure 9.03), indicating
Figure 9.01: State-wise distribution of elephant corridors India

10
11
Number of Corridors
28
25
8
6 23
14
4
North Western India Central India Northern West Bengal

2
North Eastern India Southern India
Figure 9.02: Elephant corridors in different zones of India

0
greater fragmentation of the smaller forest habitats. In other words, the more
Jharkhand-West Bengal
Chhatisgarh
Assam
Kerala
Arunachal Pradesh
Tamil Nadu
Jharkhand
Tamil Nadu-Karnataka
Odisha
Meghalaya
North Bengal
Karnataka
Uttarakhand
Odisha-Jharkhand
Arunachal Pradesh-Assam
Karnataka-Kerala
the degradation of the habitats, the more the number of corridors.
On a zonal basis, the highest number of corridors is present in Northern West

Bengal, which has one corridor for every 150 sq km of available elephant
habitat, whereas North-east India has about one corridor for every 1565 sq
km of available elephant habitat. Southern India has one corridor for every
764 765
766
90 20
80 18
70 16
14
60
12
50
10
40
8
30
Number of Corridors
% of the forest cover in State

20 4
10 2
0 0
Kerala
Assam
Odisha
Karnataka
Jharkhand
Meghalaya
Tamil Nadu
Chhatisgarh
West Bengal
Uttarakhand
Arunachal Pradesh
% Forest Cover compared to the State Geographical area No of corridors
Figure 9.03: Forest cover and elephant corridors in different states of India
25
20
15
10
5
% of the corridors in the region
0
North Western Central India Northern West North Eastern Southern India
India Bengal India
Ecologically High Ecologically Medium Ecologically Low

Conservation High Conservation Medium Conservation Low
Figure 9.04: Ecological and Conservation priority of corridors in the different zones
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
767
1410 sq km of available habitat; North-western India has one corridor for

every 500 sq km of available habitat; and Central India has a corridor for every
840 sq km of available elephant habitat.
Figures 9.05 & 9.06: Length of the corridors in different zones (top); breadth of the corridors in different zones (above)
>15
Of the identified corridors, 57.5% are ecologically of high priority and 41.5%
are of medium priority, indicating that most of them are important for elephant
Southern India
>5
Southern India
>13-15
movement. Based on conservation feasibility, 38.6% are of high feasibility,
51.5% of medium and 9.9% of low feasibility (Figure 9.4).
>11-13
The dimensions of corridors indicate the level of fragmentation between
North Eastern India

North Eastern India
the connecting habitats. Corridor lands vary from a maximum of 40-45
>3-5
km in Surguja-Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) to a minimum of 0-100 metres in
Length of corridor in Km
>9-11
Chamrajanagar-Talamalai at Punjur (Karnataka). Analysis of the dimensions
of a corridor indicates that 39.1% of the corridors in North-eastern India and
32.14% of the corridors in Southern India have a length of one kilometre
Width of corridor in Km
Northern West Bengal

Northern West Bengal
>7-9
or less. About 36.3% of the corridors in North-western India are of three to
five kilometres in length whereas 36% of the corridors in Central India are
> 1-3
more than 15 km in length. Overall, currently 22.8% of the corridors are one
>5-7
kilometre or less (compared to 28.5% of the corridors in 2005) and 17.8% of
the corridors are between one to three kilometres (compared to 19.3% in
2005), indicating further fragmentation of the habitats and corridors.
Central India
Central India
> 3-5
>0.5-1
When the width of the corridor (the constriction on either side of the corridor
connecting the habitats) is analysed, 48.5% of the corridors are between 0
> 1-3
North Western India

and 500 metres in width and 25.7% of the corridors are of 500 metres to one
North Western India

kilometre in width. In 2005, about 45.5% of the corridors were one kilometre
or less in width. Further, only about 21.8% of the corridors are of one to three
< =1
kilometres in width currently, compared to 41% in 2005. This indicates that
0-0.5
the corridors have further constricted due to biotic pressure and other land
5
0
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
use changes. % of corridors in the region
0
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Biotic pressure on the corridors was also looked at to understand the impact % of the corridors in the region
it has on corridors and their sustainability. Looking at the land use patterns
of the corridor lands, the most severely affected corridors are in Central India
768 769
where almost 88% of the corridors are jointly under forest, agriculture and Thus, there has been a severe negative impact on several corridors in the
settlements and only 4% of the corridors are completely forest. In Northern last decade (Figure 9.07). Corridors under the combination of tea garden and
West Bengal, 57.1% of the corridors are under forest, tea plantation and forest land can be safeguarded only through the strict enforcement of the
settlements and 35.7% are under forest, tea plantation, agriculture and law prohibiting land use changes, especially labour lines and other structures
settlements. In North-Eastern India, about 47.8% of the corridors are under coming up in these tea gardens.
forest, agriculture and settlements and 13% have forest, tea plantation and
settlements. In Southern India, 35.7% of the corridors are totally under About 46.5% of the corridors in Southern India are without any settlements
forest cover compared to 65% in 2005. In North-Western India, 54.5% of the (compared to 40% in 2005) and a similar percentage with one to three
corridors are jointly under forest, agriculture and settlements and 27.3% are settlements, showing comparatively little pressure on the corridors. In
under forest and settlements. Overall, only 12.9% of the corridors are totally North-Western India, 36.4% of the corridors are without settlements and a
under forest cover compared to 24% in 2005. Similarly, 44.5% of the corridors similar percentage with one to three settlements. In northern West Bengal,
are currently jointly under forest, agriculture and settlements compared to about 57.2% of the corridors are with 1-3 settlements and 28.6% with 4-6
40% in 2005, and 15.85% are under forest, tea garden and settlements as settlements. In North eastern India, about 52.2% of the corridors are with
compared to 16% in 2005. 1-3 settlements and 30.4% with 4-6 settlements. In Central India, 36% of the
90
60
80
50
70
% of corridors in each region
% of the corridor in the region

60
40
50
30
40
30 20
20
10
10
0 0
F F+S F+A F+A+S F+P+S F+P+S+A F+P North Western India Central India Northern West Bengal North Eastern India Southern India
North Western India Central India Northern West Bengal North Eastern India Southern India Nil 1-3 4-6 7-9 >9
Figure 9.07: Land use pattern of the corridors Figure 9.08: Presence of settlements in the corridors
F= Forest S= Settlements A= Agriculture

P= Plantation (tea/coffee garden)
770 771
100
90
% of corridors in the region
40
80

35
70
30
60
25
50
40 20
30 15
20 10
10 5
0 0
North Western Central India Northern West North Eastern Southern India North Western India Central India Northern West Bengal North Eastern India Southern India
India Bengal India
Railway track proposed railway track
NH SH Other road
Figure: 9.09: Percentage of corridors with roads/highways Figure 9.10: Percentage of corridors with railway lines
corridors have one to three settlements and 36% of the corridors have more footprints) may be much larger than the actual cleared footprints due to
than nine settlements. Across all regions, 21.8% of the corridors are free of negative effects that penetrate the forest to varying distances (Goosem et al.,
human settlements compared to 22.8% in 2005, and 45.5% of the corridors 2010). The response of an ecosystem to impacts is governed by many factors,
have one to three settlements compared to 42% in 2005. For corridors with and different ecosystems can be expected to adapt in different ways to road
one to three settlements, efforts should be made on an urgent basis to related impacts (Rajvanshi et al., 2011). It is seen that various developmental
voluntarily rehabilitate these settlements to facilitate animal movement and activities and human settlements also come up on either side of highways
secure the corridors. and rail tracks, further fragmenting corridor habitats and increasing biotic
pressure.
Another factor affecting elephant movement through corridors is the presence
of linear infrastructure elements (roads, railway lines, canals). Almost 66.3% Apart from roads, 20 corridors have a railway line passing through them and
of the corridors have highways (national and/or state) passing through them in four corridors, a railway line has been proposed or construction work is
(Figure 9.09). The physical presence of the roads and railway lines creates new in progress. Almost 36.4% of the corridors in North-Western India, 32% in
habitat edges, alters hydrological dynamics, and leads to habitat fragmentation Central India, 35.7% in Northern West Bengal and 13% of corridors in North-
and loss. It also creates a barrier to the movement of elephants and other Eastern India have a railway line passing through them (Figure 9.10). From 1987
animals, disrupting their social activities apart from causing death due to train to July 2017, 266 elephants have been killed by train-hits in different parts of
and vehicular collisions. Railway lines and an increase in road traffic operate the country. Some basic precautions need to be taken when a railway line
in a synergetic way across several landscapes and cause not only an overall passes through a corridor or habitat. Regulation of train speeds, preventing
loss and isolation of wildlife habitats, but also split up the landscape in a literal the dumping of food wastes in forest areas, realigning train schedules so
sense. The area of forest habitats affected by roads and railways (ecological that they cross important corridors during the day (when wildlife movement
772 773
70
% of corridor with encroachment in the region

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
North Central India Northern North Eastern Southern
Western West Bengal India India
India
Figure 9.11: Subarnarekha canal in Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary with an Figure 9.12: Percentage of corridors with encroachment
overpass for wildlife movement
is less), widening of curves and embankments, and clearing of vegetation Overall, almost 11% of corridors across the country are affected by canals.
along the tracks (especially on curves) to increase vision of drivers, all need The negative impacts of these canals could have been drastically reduced if
to be taken up. Sensor based Animal Detection Systems should be installed mitigation plans were undertaken during the planning stage itself. The canals
along the tracks to alert train drivers of animal movement in critical stretches. could have been made underground or with appropriate overpasses to
Overpasses or underpasses can also be constructed in corridors wherever facilitate wildlife movement.
possible to prevent accidents. Almost 20% of corridors require an overpass
for vehicles on an urgent basis to facilitate the unhindered movement of Apart from linear infrastructure, the corridors are also severely affected
elephants. WII (2016) has suggested overpass and underpass designs on by various biotic factors. A large extent of corridor habitat is lost due to
highways and railway lines encroachment, which fragments the habitat. Among the identified corridors
in India, 28.7% have been encroached upon. In North-Eastern India, 69.6% of
Other linear infrastructure elements of major concern are the irrigation and corridors are affected by encroachment. Similarly, 44% of corridors in Central
power canals passing through corridors. The Rengali canal in Odisha and the India and 54.5% in North-Western India are affected by encroachment.
Subarnarekha canal in Jharkhand and southern West Bengal have severely
affected elephant movement in Central India, thereby isolating the population Almost 12% of all corridors are affected by mining and boulder extraction. The
and increasing human-elephant conflict. Almost 40% of the corridors in Central corridors also pass through agriculture land and/or are encroached upon for
India and 27% in North-Western India are affected by these irrigation canals. cultivation. About 2/3rd of the corridors are affected by agriculture activities
774 775
% of corridor with PA on one or both

100
% of the corridor in the region
90 90
80
70 80
60
50 70
40
30 60
sides
20
10
50
0
40
North Western Central India Northern West North Eastern Southern India
India Bengal India 30
Settled cultivation Jhum 20
Figure 9.13: Percentage of corridors with agriculture land 10
0
North Central Northern North Southern
Western India West Eastern India
of which 58.4% falls under settled cultivation and 10.9% under slash and
India Bengal India
burn (jhum) cultivation. All the corridors in Northern West Bengal (100%) and
almost all in Central India (96%) and North-Eastern India (52.2% under settled Figure 9.14: Protected Areas in and around corridors
cultivation and 43.4% under slash and burn cultivation) have agriculture land.
About 72.7% of the corridors in North-Western India and 32% corridors in
Southern India have agriculture land. Apart from these pressures, almost
40% of all corridors are also affected by Institutions/factories/industries/ 100
90

restaurants (dhabas) etc. Almost half the corridors are also affected by 80
deforestation, largely in Central, North-Eastern and North-Western India. 70
60
50
40
Corridors become more vital when they connect Protected Areas (PAs) or
30
are close to Protected Areas, increasing the habitat available to elephants 20
10
on the fringes of the PAs. It also helps the corridor during the securing 0
process when the secured land is included as part of the Protected Area North Western Central India Northern West North Eastern India Southern India
India Bengal
for better management, or if the corridor is secured through the extension
Regular Occasional Rare
of the Protected Area. Some 47.5% of corridors have a Protected Area
at one or both ends or are within a Protected Area. Almost 81.8% of the
Figure 9.15: Usage of the corridors by elephants
corridors in North-Western India, 69.6% in North-Eastern India and 64.3% in
Southern India have a Protected Area at one or both ends or are within a
Protected Area.
776 777
One of the most important parameters that defines an elephant corridor is degradation and a consequent rise in human-elephant conflict. While
its functionality, that is, its usage by elephants. Almost 69.3% of all corridors planning infrastructure development in such regions, appropriate
are regularly used by elephants, either around the year or in a particular mitigation measures should be finalised during the planning stages to
season. Some 24.75% of the corridors are used occasionally and 5.95% are minimise impact. The overall policy in these areas should aim towards the
rarely used. A large proportion of the corridors in Southern India (92.9%), long-term conservation of wildlife by ensuring the protection of larger
Northern West Bengal (85.7%) and North-East India (65.2%) is regularly used forest areas.
by elephants. Hence, it is important that the identified corridors are secured
for the free passage of elephants and other wild animals. Seven corridors have been impaired in last one decade and many more are
on the verge of being impaired. This has been due to the lack of any agency
To ensure that corridors are protected and secured, it is important that keeping a close eye on these corridors so that land use changes could be
they are legally protected to prevent further fragmentation of habitat and detected in time and mitigation measures initiated. Hence, it is important
increased human-elephant conflict. To achieve this, state governments to engage local community-based organisations in corridor areas as ‘Green
should first demarcate and notify these corridors as State Elephant Corridors, Corridor Champions’ (GCCs), who will work as the eyes, ears and voice of
which could then be legally protected under appropriate sections of the corridors. GCCs will be charged with sensitising, motivating and mobilising
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. A corridor could also be secured by working local communities, and creating a sense of pride and ownership among them
with the local community and government (Autonomous District Council) to towards elephant corridors. They will work to secure and monitor the status
reduce local dependency on corridor land, and getting the corridor notified of corridors by coordinating the actions of local self-governments, state and
as a Village Reserve Forest by the Council, or as a Community Reserve by the central governments, and other stakeholders.
relevant state forest department.
It is also important to inform people and developmental agencies about the

importance of a particular corridor through the placement of scientifically
designed signages in the corridor area. This will assist the local planning
authorities to plan developmental activities in an ecologically sensitive manner.
It will help vehicles passing through the corridor to take due precaution of
speed limits. It will also prevent land use changes in the corridor area as the
stakeholders are made aware of the criticality of the area. Wildlife Trust of
India and state forest departments have together fixed signboards in almost
all the identified elephant corridors (except in Odisha) over the last decade,
but these now need to be fixed in all the 101 corridors, and the damaged/lost
signages replaced.
Development policies in elephant habitats should be thoroughly discussed,

involving various stakeholders to prevent further fragmentation and
778 779
780
S. CORRIDOR NAME AREA OF POPULATION USAGE OF PRESENCE OF TOTAL RANKING
NO. HABITAT CONNECTED CORRIDOR ALTERNATE POINTS
CONNECTED ROUTE
NORTH-WESTERN
INDIA
1 KANSRAU - BARKOTE 3 2 3 1 9 High
2 MOTICHUR - BARKOTE 3 2 2 1 8 High
& RISHIKESH
3 MOTICHUR - GOHRI 3 2 1 1 7 Medium
4 CHILLA - MOTICHUR 3 2 3 1 9 High
5 RAWSAN - SONANADI 3 3 3 1 10 High
(VIA LANSDOWNE FD)

6 RAWSAN - SONANADI ( 3 3 2 1 9 High
VIA BIJNOR FD )
7 MALANI - K0TA 3 3 3 1 10 High
8 CHILKIYA - KOTA 3 3 2 1 9 High
9 SOUTH PATLIDUN - 3 3 3 1 10 High
APPENDIX 1
CHILKIYA
10 FATHEHPUR - 3 1 2 2 8 High
IDENTIFIED corridors
GADGADIA
11 KILPURA - KHATIMA - 2 1 2 2 7 Medium
Ecological prioritisation of
SURAI
CENTRAL INDIA
12 TAMORPINGLA – 2 1 3 2 8 High
JASHPUR
13 SURGUJA - JASHPUR 2 1 3 2 8 High

14 MAHILONG - KALIMATI 2 1 2 2 7 Medium
15 CHANDIL - MATHA 1 1 1 1 4 Low
16 DALMA - CHANDIL 2 1 1 1 5 Medium
17 DALMA - RUGAI 1 1 2 1 5 Medium
18 DALMA - ASANBARI 1 1 2 1 5 Medium
19 JHUNJHAKA- BANDUAN 1 1 2 1 5 Medium
20 DALAPANI - 2 2 2 1 7 Medium
KANKRAJHOR
21 DUMRIYA - NAYAGRAM 2 1 2 2 7 Medium
22 RAIBERA - PULBABURU 3 1 1 2 7 Medium
23 ANKUA - AMBIA 3 1 3 2 9 High
24 ANJADBERA- 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
BICHABURU
25 KARO - KARAMPADA 2 1 3 2 8 High
26 BADAMPAHAR - 1 2 2 2 7 Medium
DHOBADHOBIN
27 BADAMPAHAR - 2 2 1 2 7 Medium
KARIDA EAST
28 SIMILIPAL - SATKOSIA 3 2 3 2 10 High
29 BAULA - KULDIHA 2 1 2 2 7 Medium
30 KANHEIJENA - 2 1 2 2 7 Medium
ANANTAPUR
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
781
782
CONNECTED ROUTE
31 ANANTAPUR - 1 1 2 2 6 Medium
ASWAKHOLA (VIA
JIRIDIMAL)
32 ASWAKHOLA - 1 1 2 2 6 Medium
SUNAJHARI
33 BUGUDA-CENTRAL 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
34 NUAGAON - BARUNI 2 1 3 2 8 High
35 TAL- KHOLGARH 2 1 3 2 8 High
36 KOTAGARH – 3 1 3 2 9 High
PANKHALGUDI
NORTHERN WEST
BENGAL
37 APALCHAND - 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
MAHANANDA
GORUMARA
KALIMPONG AT MAL
BLOCK (VIA SYLEE)
40 APALCHAND- 2 1 3 1 7 Medium
KALIMPONG AT
MAL BLOCK (VIA
MEENGLASS)
41 CHAPRAMARI- 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
KALIMPONG (MAL
BLOCK)
42 RETHI - CENTRAL 1 1 3 1 6 Medium
DIANA
43 RETHI - MORAGHAT 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
44 MORAGHAT – CENTRAL 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
DIANA
45 TITI – RETHI VIA 1 1 3 1 6 Medium
DUMCHI
46 TITI – RETHI 1 1 3 1 6 Medium
47 BUXA - TITI (VIA TORSA) 3 1 2 1 7 Medium
48 BUXA - TITI (VIA BEECH 3 1 3 1 8 High
& BHARNOBARI TE)
49 NIMATI - CHILAPATA 3 1 2 2 8 High
50 BUXA - RIPU AT 3 2 3 2 10 High
SANKOSH
NORTH-EAST INDIA
51 PAKKE - DOIMARA AT 3 2 1 1 7 Medium
TIPPI
52 PAKKE- DOIMARA AT 3 2 2 1 8 High
DADZU-LUMIA
53 PAKKE - PAPUM AT 3 2 3 1 9 High
LONGKA NULLAH
54 PAKKE - PAPUM AT 3 2 3 1 9 High
SEIJOSA NULLAH
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
783
784
CONNECTED ROUTE
55 DURPONG - DOIMUKH 2 2 1 2 7 Medium
AT KHUNDAKHUWA
56 DULUNG - SUBANSIRI 3 1 1 2 7 Medium
57 D'ERING - MEBO AT 2 2 2 2 8 High
SIGAR NULLAH
58 D'ERING – DIBRU 2 2 3 2 9 High
SAIKHOWA
59 KOTHA-BURIHIDING 1 1 2 2 6 Medium
60 UPPER DIHING EAST - 2 1 3 1 7 Medium

UPPER DIHING WEST
BLOCK AT BOGAPANI
61 UPPER DIHING EAST - 2 1 2 1 6 Medium
UPPER DIHING WEST
BLOCK BETWEEN
GOLAI - PAWAI
62 KALAPAHAR - 2 2 3 2 9 High
DAIGRUNG
63 KAZIRANGA- KARBI 3 3 3 1 10 High
ANGLONG AT PANBARI
64 KAZIRANGA – KARBI 3 3 2 1 9 High
ANGLONG AT
HALDIBARI
65 KAZIRANGA - KARBI 3 3 3 1 10 High

ANGLONG AT
KANCHANJURI
66 KAZIRANGA – EAST 3 3 3 1 10 High
KARBI ANGLONG AT
DEOSUR
67 KUKURAKATA - 3 2 1 1 7 Medium
BAGSER AT AMGURI
68 BORNADI - 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
KHALINGDUAR
69 RANGGIRA - NOKREK 3 1 1 2 7 Medium
70 NOKREK - IMANGRE 3 1 3 2 9 High
71 REWAK - IMANGRE 3 1 3 2 9 High
72 SIJU - REWAK 3 1 3 2 9 High
73 BAGHMARA- 3 2 3 2 10 High
BALPAKRAM
SOUTHERN INDIA
74 KARADIKKAL - 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
MADESHWARA
75 TALI-BILIKKAL 2 2 3 2 9 High
76 BILIKKAL – JAVALAGIRI 1 2 3 2 8 High
77 EDAYARHALLI – 3 3 3 2 11 High
GUTTIYALATTUR
78 EDAYARHALLI - 3 3 3 2 11 High
DODDASAMPIGE
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
785
786
CONNECTED ROUTE
79 CHAMARAJANAGAR - 3 3 3 1 10 High
TALAMALAI AT PUNJUR
80 CHAMARAJANAGAR 3 3 3 1 10 High
- TALAMALAI AT
MUDDAHALLI
81 TALAMALAI - 2 3 3 2 10 High
GUTTIYALATTUR
82 KALHATTI - SIGUR AT 2 2 3 1 8 High
GLENCORIN
83 AVARAHALLA - SIGUR 3 3 3 1 10 High

84 KALMALAI - SINGARA 3 3 3 1 10 High
AND AVARAHALLA
85 MOYAR - AVARAHALLA 2 3 3 1 9 High
86 KANIYANPURA - 3 3 3 2 11 High
MOYAR
87 BEGUR - BRAHMAGIRI 3 3 3 1 10 High
88 TIRUNELLI - 3 3 3 2 11 High
KUDRAKOTE
89 KOTTIYUR - PERIYA 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
90 PERIYA AT 1 1 3 2 7 Medium
PAKRANTHALAM
91 NILAMBUR AT 2 1 3 2 8 High
APPANKAPPU
92 NILAMBUR KOVILAKAM 2 1 2 2 7 Medium
- NEW AMARAMBALAM
93 MUDUMALAI – 3 3 3 2 11 High
NILAMBUR VIA O’
VALLEY
94 JACCANAIRE SLOPE - 3 3 3 2 11 High
HULIKAL DURGAM
95 ANAIKATTI NORTH – 3 2 3 2 10 High
ANAIKATTI SOUTH
96 ANAIMALAI AT 3 3 3 1 10 High
PUNACHI
97 ANAIMALAI AT 3 3 2 1 9 High
WATERFALLS ESTATE
98 ANAIMALAI BETWEEN 3 3 2 1 9 High
SILUVAIMEDU -
KADAMPARAI
99 VAZHACHAL – 3 3 3 1 10 High
ANAIMALAI VIA
SHOLAYAR
100 VAZHACHAL - 3 3 3 1 10 High
ANAIMALAI VIA RYAN
101 SRIVILLIPUTHUR - 2 1 3 2 8 High
SAPTUR
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
787
ECOLOGICAL RANKING SCALE
ECOLOGICAL PRIORITY
PARAMETERS SCORE
2 1
Area of habitat 250 sq km each < 250 - 150 sq km < 150 sq km each
being connected or more than 500 each or 300 - 500 or < 300 sq km
sq km combining sq km combining combining both
both both
Population >400 200 - 400 < 200
connected
Usage of corridor Regular Occasional Rare
Presence of No Yes
alternate route
Ranking high (11- 8) Medium (7-5) (36 Low (4 and below)
- 70%)
788 789
790
S.NO.
TOTAL COST
CIVIL UNREST
TOTAL SCORE
POLITICAL WILL
ENCROACHMENT
CORRIDOR NAME
MAJOR LAND USE
USERS/INDUSTRIES
RAIL TRAFFIC INTENSITY

RELOCATION OF PEOPLE
ROAD TRAFFIC INTENSITY
LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE
CONSERVATION FEASIBILITY
AREA OF LAND FOR PURCHASE
COMMUNITY WILLINGNESS SCORE
SETTLEMENTS INSIDE THE CORRIDOR

PRESENCE OF ARMY/MILITARY/INSTITUTIONAL
NORTH-WESTERN INDIA
1 KANSRAU - BARKOTE 3 3 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 34 High
APPENDIX 2
2 MOTICHUR - BARKOTE & 3 3 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 34 High

RISHIKESH
3 MOTICHUR - GOHRI 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 24 Medium
IDENTIFIED corridors
4 CHILLA - MOTICHUR 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 27 High

5 RAWSAN - SONANADI (VIA 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 2 3 1 2 24 Medium
CONSERVATION FEASIBILITY of
LANSDOWNE FD)
6 RAWSAN - SONANADI ( VIA 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 3 2 2 1 3 1 22 Medium
BIJNOR FD )
7 MALANI - K0TA 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 1 26 Medium
8 CHILKIYA - KOTA 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 21 Medium

9 SOUTH PATLIDUN - CHILKIYA 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 24 Medium
10 FATHEHPUR - GADGADIA 2 3 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 3 3 1 28 High
11 KILPURA - KHATIMA - SURAI 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 18 Low
CENTRAL INDIA
12 TAMORPINGLA – JASHPUR 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 23 Medium
13 SURGUJA - JASHPUR 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 23 Medium
14 MAHILONG - KALIMATI 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 19 Low
15 CHANDIL - MATHA 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 2 1 3 2 2 22 Medium
16 DALMA - CHANDIL 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 22 Medium
17 DALMA - RUGAI 1 2 1 1 3 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 1 25 Medium
18 DALMA - ASANBARI 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 34 High
19 JHUNJHAKA- BANDUAN 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 23 Medium
20 DALAPANI - KANKRAJHOR 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 2 3 1 26 Medium
21 DUMRIYA - NAYAGRAM 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 1 21 Medium
22 RAIBERA - PULBABURU 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 3 1 2 3 2 2 24 Medium
23 ANKUA - AMBIA 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 25 Medium
24 ANJADBERA- BICHABURU 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 19 Low
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
791
792
S.NO.
TOTAL COST
CIVIL UNREST
TOTAL SCORE
POLITICAL WILL
ENCROACHMENT
CORRIDOR NAME
MAJOR LAND USE
PRESENCE OF ARMY/MILITARY/
SETTLEMENTS INSIDE CORRIDOR

INSTITUTIONAL USERS/INDUSTRIES
25 KARO - KARAMPADA 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 22 Medium

26 BADAMPAHAR - 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 20 Medium
DHOBADHOBIN
27 BADAMPAHAR - KARIDA EAST 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 18 Low
28 SIMILIPAL - SATKOSIA 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 21 Medium
29 BAULA - KULDIHA 1 1 2 3 3 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 21 Medium
30 KANHEIJENA - ANANTAPUR 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 18 Low
31 ANANTAPUR - ASWAKHOLA (VIA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 1 19 Low
JIRIDIMAL)
32 ASWAKHOLA - SUNAJHARI 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 25 Medium
33 BUGUDA-CENTRAL 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 18 Low
34 NUAGAON - BARUNI 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 26 Medium
35 TAL- KHOLGARH 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 21 Medium
36 KOTAGARH – PANKHALGUDI 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 23 Medium
NORTHERN WEST BENGAL
37 APALCHAND - MAHANANDA 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 24 Medium

38 APALCHAND - GORUMARA 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 2 3 3 1 2 24 Medium
39 APALCHAND - KALIMPONG AT 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 21 Medium
MAL BLOCK (VIA SYLEE)
40 APALCHAND-KALIMPONG AT 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 18 Low
MAL BLOCK (VIA MEENGLASS)
41 CHAPRAMARI-KALIMPONG 1 1 2 3 3 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 25 Medium
(MAL BLOCK)
42 RETHI - MORAGHAT 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 20 Medium
43 MORAGHAT – CENTRAL DIANA 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 26 Medium
44 TITI – RETHI VIA DUMCHI 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 22 Medium
45 RETHI - CENTRAL DIANA 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 2 19 Low
46 TITI – RETHI 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 2 22 Medium
47 BUXA - TITI (VIA TORSA) 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 25 Medium
48 BUXA - TITI 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 21 Medium
(VIA BEECH & BHARNOBARI TE)
49 NIMATI - CHILAPATA 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 22 Medium
50 BUXA - RIPU AT SANKOSH 1 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 24 Medium
NORTH-EAST INDIA
51 PAKKE - DOIMARA AT TIPPI 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 21 Medium

52 PAKKE- DOIMARA AT DADZU- 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 29 High
LUMIA
53 PAKKE - PAPUM AT LONGKA 1 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 33 High
NULLAH
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
793
794
S.NO.
TOTAL COST
CIVIL UNREST
TOTAL SCORE
POLITICAL WILL
ENCROACHMENT
CORRIDOR NAME
MAJOR LAND USE
SETTLEMENTS INSIDE CORRIDOR

54 PAKKE - PAPUM AT SEIJOSA 1 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 31 High

NULLAH
55 DURPONG - DOIMUKH AT 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 22 Medium
KHUNDAKHUWA
56 DULUNG - SUBANSIRI 1 2 2 2 3 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 24 Medium
57 D'ERING - MEBO AT SIGAR 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 32 High
NULLAH
58 D'ERING – DIBRU SAIKHOWA 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 29 High
59 KOTHA-BURIHIDING 1 1 3 3 3 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 24 Medium
60 UPPER DIHING EAST - UPPER 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 2 2 2 3 1 1 21 Medium
DIHING WEST BLOCK B/W
GOLAI - PAWAI
61 UPPER DIHING EAST - UPPER 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 23 Medium
DIHING WEST BLOCK AT
BOGAPANI
62 KALAPAHAR - DAIGRUNG 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 2 2 28 High
63 KAZIRANGA- KARBI ANGLONG 1 2 2 1 3 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 2 27 High

AT PANBARI
64 KAZIRANGA - KARBI ANGLONG 1 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 32 High
AT KANCHANJURI
65 KAZIRANGA – KARBI ANGLONG 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 34 High
AT HALDIBARI
66 KAZIRANGA – EAST 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 35 High
KARBIANGLONG AT DEOSUR
67 KUKURAKATA - BAGSER AT 1 2 2 1 3 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 1 24 Medium
AMGURI
68 BORNADI - KHALINGDUAR 1 1 3 3 3 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 24 Medium
69 RANGGIRA - NOKREK 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 19 Low
70 NOKREK - IMANGRE 1 1 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 2 26 Medium
71 REWAK - IMANGRE 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 3 3 3 2 32 High
72 SIJU - REWAK 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 3 3 3 2 29 High
73 BAGHMARA-BALPAKRAM 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 3 3 3 2 30 High
SOUTHERN INDIA
74 KARADIKKAL - MADESHWARA 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 2 1 31 High
75 TALI-BILIKKAL 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 2 28 High
76 BILIKKAL – JAVALAGIRI 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 33 High
77 EDAYARHALLI – 1 2 3 3 3 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 29 High
GUTTIYALATTUR
78 EDAYARHALLI - 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 36 High
DODDASAMPIGE
79 CHAMARAJANAGAR - 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 21 Medium
TALAMALAI AT PUNJUR
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
795
796
S.NO.
TOTAL COST
CIVIL UNREST
TOTAL SCORE
POLITICAL WILL
ENCROACHMENT
CORRIDOR NAME
MAJOR LAND USE

SETTLEMENTS INSIDE THE CORRIDOR

80 CHAMARAJANAGAR - 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 29 High
TALAMALAI AT MUDDAHALLI
81 TALAMALAI - GUTTIYALATTUR 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 27 High
82 KALHATTI - SIGUR AT 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 1 27 High
GLENCORIN
83 AVARAHALLA - SIGUR 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 1 31 High
84 KALMALAI - SINGARA AND 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 1 30 High
AVARAHALLA
85 MOYAR - AVARAHALLA 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 37 High
86 KANIYANPURA - MOYAR 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 36 High
87 BEGUR - BRAHMAGIRI 2 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 2 3 1 3 1 26 Medium
88 TIRUNELLI - KUDRAKOTE 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 38 High
89 KOTTIYUR - PERIYA 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 24 Medium
90 PERIYA AT PAKRANTHALAM 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 1 27 High
91 NILAMBUR AT APPANKAPPU 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 27 High
92 NILAMBUR KOVILAKAM - NEW 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 34 High

AMARAMBALAM
93 MUDUMALAI – NILAMBUR VIA 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 1 25 Medium
O’ VALLEY
94 JACCANAIRE SLOPE - HULIKAL 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 21 Medium
DURGAM
95 ANAIKATTI NORTH – ANAIKATTI 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 26 Medium
SOUTH
96 ANAIMALAI AT PUNACHI 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 36 High
97 ANAIMALAI AT WATERFALLS 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 32 High
ESTATE
98 ANAIMALAI BETWEEN 3 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 34 High
SILUVAIMEDU - KADAMPARAI
99 VAZHACHAL – ANAIMALAI VIA 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 3 2 3 3 3 1 26 Medium
SHOLAYAR
100 VAZHACHAL - ANAIMALAI VIA 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 3 2 3 3 3 1 26 Medium
RYAN
101 SRIVILLIPUTHUR - SAPTUR 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 1 3 1 32 High
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
797
798
PARAMETERS SCORE
3 2 1
Major land use Forest Forest and agriculture OR Forest, agriculture,
Forest and plantation settlement OR Forest,
plantation, settlement OR
Forest, mining, settlement OR
Forest and settlement
Settlements inside 0 settlements 1-5 settlements OR <50 >6-9 settlements OR
the corridor families >50 families
Linear 0 linear threats 1 linear threat 2-3 linear threats

Infrastructure
(cemented
irrigation canal,
railway track,
highway-SH/NH)
Presence of No <25 of corridor area >25%
Institutions/army threatened
establishments/
industries
Civil unrest No Yes
conservation RANKING SCALE
Encroachment No <25 of corridor area >25%

threatened
Political Will High Medium Low
Community High Medium Low

willingness
Land Purchase Area No land purchase 1-50 acres >51 acres
for securing
Total cost of Under Rs 1 crore Rs 1-8 crore More than Rs 8 crore

securing
Road traffic 1- 50 vehicles per hour 51-100 vehicles per hour >100 vehicles per hour
intensity
Railway traffic <10 trains per day 11 - 24 trains per day >25 trains per day
intensity
Relocation of None 2 settlements or <50 More than 2 settlements or

people for securing families > 50 families
High priority 38-27

Medium priority 26-20
Low priority 19 and below
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
799
Bennet, A F (1990). Habitat corridors and the conservation of small mammals

Bibliography in a fragmented forest environment. Landscape Ecology 4: 109-122
Bennett, A F (2003). The role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife

conservation. IUCN Forest Conservation Programme. Conserving Forest
Ali, S A (1927). The Moghul Emperors of India as naturalists and sportsmen. Ecosystem Series No. 1. IUCN publication.
Anonymous (1999). National Elephant Conservation Action Plan. Part-III.
State summaries. Project Elephant. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Bist, S S (2002). An overview of elephant conservation in India. Indian Forester
Govt. of India, New Delhi. 128(2): 121-136
Anonymous (undated). A provisional list of elephant corridors in India. Biswal, A K, Jha, A, Gaan, P and Mohan P K (2010). Report of the four
Project Elephant. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Mimeo. member committee for enquiry into the cause of death of elephants due
to electrocution in Orissa. Submitted to Ministry of Environment & Forests,
Barua, P and Bist, S S (1995). Changing patterns in the distribution and Government of India.
movement of wild elephants in North Bengal. In: Daniel, J C and Datye, H S
ed. A week with elephants. Proceedings of the International seminar on Asian Chakraborty, S (2015). Human-Animal Conflicts in Northern West Bengal:
elephants. Bombay Natural History Society. Pp 66-84 Losses on both sides. International Journal of Pure & Applied Bioscience 3, No.
3 (June 2015): 2320 – 7051
Baskaran, N, G Kannan & U Anbarasan (2006). Resolving human-elephant
conflict in Theni Forest Division, Tamil Nadu, Southern India. Report to Champion, H and Seth, S (1964). A Revised Survey of Forest Types of India.
Theni Forest Division. Asian Elephant Research and Conservation Centre, Forest Research Institute & College, Dehradun
a Division of Asian Nature Conservation Foundation, Centre for Ecological
Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, India Chanda, Subhamay (undated). Man-elephant conflict in south West Bengal
http://www.teriuniversity.ac.in/mct/pdf/assignment/SUBHAMAY-CHANDA.pdf
Baskaran N, Kannan G, Anbarasan U & Sukumar R (2007) Conservation of
the Elephant Population in the Anamalais-Nelliyampathis and Palani Hills Chatterjee, M, Mahapatra, R P, Mallik, M, Sen, S, Sucharita, S and
(Project Elephant Range 9), Southern India. Final report to USFWS, Asian Ashraf N V K (2014). Elephant-train collision mitigation plan for six forest
Nature Conservation Foundation, Bangalore divisions of Odisha State. Project Report. Wildlife Trust of India
Baskaran, N, 2013. An overview of Asian Elephants in the Western Ghats, Choudhury, A (1993a). Elephants on the war path. India Magazine. February,
southern India: implications for the conservation of Western Ghats ecology. 66-67.
Journal of Threatened Taxa 5, 4854–4870
Choudhury, A (1993b). A Naturalist in Karbi Anglong. Gibbon Books, Guwahati.
800 801
Choudhury, A (1995). Status of wild elephants in Dibang Valley of Arunachal Das, Kalyan (undated). Man–Elephant Conflicts in North Bengal. http://www.
Pradesh. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 92(3): 417 teriuniversity.ac.in/mct/pdf/assignment/Kalyan-Das.pdf
Choudhury, A (1999). Status and conservation of the Asian elephant Elephas Datye, H S (1995). Ecology of elephants of Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary, Bihar,
maximus in north-eastern India. Mammal Review 29(3): 141-173 Central India. In: Ecology of the Asian Elephant. Final Report (1978-1992).
Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay
Choudhury, A Unpublished Draft Action Plan, Project Elephant Ministry of
Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, New Delhi Davidar, E R C (1972). Investigation of elephant migration paths in the Nilgiri
Hills and enquiry into impediments to the free movement of elephants there
Choudhury, A U (1991). Status of wild elephants in Cachar and NC Hills, and recommendations for the provision of corridors for their movement.
Assam - a preliminary investigation. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 88(2): 215-221. Mimeo
Choudhury, A U (1992). Trunk routes. WWF- Quarterly 3(1): 14
Doak, D F and Mills, L S (1994). A useful role for theory in conservation.
Choudhury, A U (2001). Wild elephant extinct in Cachar. The Rhino Ecology 75: 615-626
Foundation for Nature, NE India Newsletter 3 : 7
Easa, P S (1989). Certain aspects of Ecology and Ethology of the Asian
Chowdhury, S, Khalid M A, Singh, A K and Singh, R R (1997). Management of Elephant (Elephas maximus) in Parambikulam Wildlife Sanctuary, South
elephant populations in West Bengal for mitigating man-elephant conflicts, India. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Kerala, Trivandrum
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun.
Easa, P S (1993). Project Elephant - A Management Plan for Elephant
Cushing, S A, McRae, B, Adriaensen, F, Beier, P, Shirley, M and Zeller, K (2013) Reserves in Kerala. Kerala Forest Research Institute, Peechi
Biological corridors and connectivity. Key Topics in Conservation Biology 2,
First Edition. Eds. D W Macdonald and K J Willis, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Easa, P S, Zacharias, J and Induchoodan, N C (1990). A Conservation Unit for
Asian Elephant. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Ecology, Behaviour and
Dabadghao, P M and Shankarnarayan, K A (1973). The grass cover of India. Management of Elephants in Kerala, 149-155. Kerala Forest Department,
Indian Council of Agriculture Research, New Delhi 23-24 February, Thiruvananthapuram
Daniel, J C Ed. (1980). The status of the Asian elephant in Indian sub-continent, Fahrig, L and Merriam, G (1994). Conservation of Fragmented Populations.
IUCN / SSC Report, Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay. Conserv. Biol. 8: 50 - 59
Danks, A (1991). The role of corridors in the management of an endangered Forman, R T T and Godron, M (1986). Landscape Ecology. John Wiley and
passerine. In: Saunders, D A and Hobb, R J eds. Nature conservation: the role sons, New York, NY
of corridors. Survey Beathy and Sons, Clipping Norton, Australia, Pp 291-296.
802 803
Forsyth, J (1889). The Highlands of Central India: Notes on the forest and Javed, S (1996). Elephants in Dudhwa. Gajah 16 (July): 17-22
wild tribes, natural history and sports. Chapman and Hall, London
Jerdon, T C (1874). The Mammals of India. John Weldon, London.
Goosem, M, Harding, E K, Chester, G, Tucker, N and Harriss, C (2010). Roads
in rainforest: Science behind the Guidelines. Guidelines prepared for the Johnsingh, A J T (1992). Elephant Corridor in Uttar Pradesh, India. In:
Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads and the Australian Proceedings of the IUCN/SSC Asian Elephant Specialist Group Meeting,
Government’s Marine and Tropical Sciences Research Facility. Reef and Bogor, Indonesia, 20-22 May
Rainforest Research Centre Limited, Cairns. Pp 76
Johnsingh, A J T (2001). Establishment of Chilla-Motichur Corridor for
Gurung, S and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2000). Project Elephant-human Elephant / Tiger Movement. Wildlife Institute of India Newsletter 8(4): 10-12
conflict in Asia. State report on Meghalaya, India. Part-I. Asian Elephant
Research and Conservation Centre Johnsingh, A J T and Joshua, J (1994). Conserving Rajaji and Corbett National
Parks Using the Elephants as Flagship Species. Oryx 28: 135-140
Gurung, S and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2001). Project: Elephant-human
conflict in Asia. State report on Meghalaya, India. Community development- Johnsingh, A J T and Williams, A C (1999). Elephant corridors in India: lessons
block reports. Part-II. Asian Elephant Research and Conservation Centre for other elephant range countries. Oryx 33(3): 210-214
Huxel, G R and Hastings, A (1999). Habitat loss, fragmentation restoration. Johnsingh, A J T, Prasad, S N and Goyal, S P (1990). Conservation of the Chilla
J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 31: 833 - 861 - Motichur corridor for elephant movement in Rajaji-Corbett National Park
areas, India. Biol. Conserv. 51:125-138
Harikrishnan, M (1972). Management plan for Theni Forest Division (1972–
1982): A report Johnsingh, A J T, Qureshi, Q, Mohan, D and Williams, A C. Unpublished Draft
Action Plan for elephants in North West India
Haddad N M, Brudvig L A, Clobert J, Davies K F, Gonzalez A, Holt R D, Lovejoy
T E, Sexton J O, Austin M P, Collins C D, Cook W M, Damschen E I, Ewers R Johnsingh, A J T, Ramesh, K, Qureshi, Q, David, A, Goyal, S P, Rawat, G S,
M, Foster B L, Jenkins C N, King A J, Laurance W F, Levey D J, Margules C R, Rajapandian K and Prasad, S (2004). Conservation status of tiger and other
Melbourne B A., Nicholls A O, Orrock J L, Song D X, Townshend J R (2015). associated species in the Terai Arc Landscape, India. RR-04/001, Wildlife
Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Sci Adv Institute of India, Dehradun
1, e1500052
Joshi, Ritesh, Singh, Rambir, Dixit, Alok, Agarwal, Rajendra, Negi, M S, Pandey,
Huxel, G R and Hasting, A (1999). Habitat loss, fragmentation restoration. Naveen, Pushola, Raju and Rawat, Sandeep (2010). Is Isolation of Protected
Restoration Ecology 7: 309-315 Habitats the Prime Conservation Concern for Endangered Asian Elephants in
Shivalik Landscape? Global Journal of Environmental Research 4 (2): 113-126
India State of Forest Report (2015), Forest Survey of India
804 805
Khan, A (1995). Elephant conservation unit: Linking two elephant populations cor-ridors for managing elephants in south Garo Hills and Nokrek area,
in North Western India. In: Daniel, J C and Datye, H S ed. A week with Meghalaya. Indian Forester 128(2): 207-216
elephants. Proceedings of the International seminar on Asian elephants.
Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay. Pp 162-176 Menon, V, Easa, P S and Johnsingh, A J T (2003). Securing the Chilla-Motichur
Corridor - Protecting the elephants of Rajaji National Park: A Status Report.
Krishnan, M (1972). An Ecological Survey of Mammals in India: The Gaur. Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi
J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 69 (2): 322-349
Menon, V, Tiwari, S K, Easa, P S and Sukumar, R (2005). Right of Passage:
Laan, R and Verboom, B (1990). Effects of pool size and isolation on amphib- Elephant Corridors of India. Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi
ian communities. Biol. Conserv. 54: Pp 251-262
Merriam, G (1991). Corridors and connectivity; animal populations in
Lahiri Choudhury, D K (1980). An interim report on the status and distribution heterogeneous environments. In: D A Saunders and R J Hobbs, eds. Nature
of elephants in north-east India. In: Daniel, J C ed. The status of the Asian Conservation 2: the role of corridor, Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping
elephant in the Indian subcontinent Pp 43-58. IUCN / SSC report, BNHS, Norton, Australia. Pp 133-142
Bombay
Mishra, Sandeep Ranjan and Bisht, H K (2016). Status study of elephant in
Little, C E (1990). Greenways for America. Baltimore (MD): John Hopkins Karanjia Division, Odisha . International Journal of Pure and Applied Zoology,
University Press Volume 4, Issue 1, pp: 24-28, 2016
Maelfait, J P and De keer, R (1990). The Border Zone of an Intensively Grazed MoEF (2012). Estimated populations of wild elephants 2007 and 2012.
Pasture as a Corridor for Spiders (Araneae). Biol. Conserv. 54: 223-238 http://www.moef.nic.in/division/introduction-4
Madhusudan, M D, Sharma, N, Raghunath, R, Baskaran, N, Bipin, CM, Gubbi, MoEF&CC (2017). Synchronized elephant population estimation: India 2017.
S, Johnsingh, A J T, Kulkarni, J, Kumara, H N, Mehta, P, Misra, A, Pillay, R, Project Elephant Division, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Sukumar, R (2015). Distribution, relative abundance, and conservation status Change, Government of India
of Asian elephants in Karnataka, southern India. Biological Conservation,
No.187 Mukherjee, Nabanita (2016). A Brief Appraisal of Human Wildlife Conflict in
Jalpaiguri and Alipurduar Districts of West Bengal. International Journal of
Marak, T T C (2002). Status, distribution and conservation of the Asian Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 6, Issue 8, August 2016
elephant (Elephas maximus) in Meghalaya. Indian Forester 128(2): 155-160
Nath, Dilip C and Mwchahary, Dimacha Dwibrang (2012). Population
Martcot, B G , Kumar, A, Roy, P S and Sawarkar, V B (2002). Towards a land- Increase and Deforestation: A Study in Kokrajhar District of Assam, India.
scape conservation strategy: Analysis of Jhum landscape and proposed International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 2, Issue
10, October 2012
806 807
Nigam, B C (2002). Elephants of Jharkhand: increasing conflict with man. Ramakrishnan, B (1995). Human interference and its impact on elephant
Indian Forester 128(2): 189-196 corridors in Sathyamangalam and Coimbatore Forest Division, Tamil Nadu,
Southern India. M.Sc. Dissertation, AVC College, Mannampandal, Tamil
Noss, R F (1987). Corridors in real landscapes: a reply to Simberloff and Cox Nadu.
Cons. Biol. 1: 159-164
Ramakrishnan, B, Sivaganesan, N and Srivastava, R K (1997). Human inter-
Olivier, R C D (1978). On the ecology of the Asian elephant. Ph.D. Thesis, ference and its impact on elephant corridors In Sathyamangalam and
University of Cambridge, UK Coimbatore Forest Division, Tamil Nadu, Southern India. Indian J. Forestry
20(1): 8-19.
Palei, Nimain C, Rath, Bhakta P and Kar, C S (2013): An Assessment of
Human-Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus) Conflict in Mayurbhanj Elephant Ramakumar, K, Manimozhi, K and Paulraj, S (2002). Status of the elephant
Reserve, Odisha, India, World Journal of Zoology 8 (3): 292-298, 2013 corridors in and around Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary,Tamil Nadu, South
India. Indian Forester 128(2): 197-206
Palei, N C, Palei, H S Rath, B P and Kar, C S (2014). Mortality of the Endangered
Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) by electrocution in Odisha, India. Oryx, Ramkumar K (2014). Studies on the human-elephant (Elephas maximus)
48(4), 602–604 conflicts with special reference to land use land cover changes in elephant
migratory route of the Coimbatore Forest Division, Tamil Nadu, India. Ph.D.
Pradhan, Rudra Narayan; Behera, Pandab and Mishra Sandeep Ranjan Thesis submitted to Bharathidasan University, Tamil Nadu, India.
(2013): Man-Elephant Conflict: Case Study from Angul Forest Division,
Odisha, India. International Research Journal of Environment Sciences, Vol. Ramkumar K and Arumugam R (2004). Evaluation of the status, land use
2(11), 106-110, November (2013) pattern and habitat utilization of elephants in corridors between Western
and Eastern ghats through Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary and Nilgiri North
Prasad, A E (2009) Tree community change in a tropical dry forest: the role Division, Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu
of roads and exotic plant invasion. Environmental Conservation 36, 201-207
Rangarajan, M, Desai, A, Sukumar, R, Easa, P S, Menon, V, Vincent, S, Ganguly,
Prasad, S N, P V Nair, H C Sharachandra & M Gadgil (1974). On factors S, Talukdar, B K, Singh, B, Mudappa, D, Chowdhary, S and Prasad, A N (2010).
governing the distribution of wild mammals in Karnataka. Journal of the Gajah: Securing the Future for Elephants in India. The Report of the Elephant
Bombay Natural History Society 82: 718–743 Task Force, Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi. Pp 169
Rajvanshi, A, Mathur V B, Teleki, G C and Mukherjee, S K (2001). Roads, Rodgers, W A and Panwar, H S (1988). Planning a Wildlife Protected Area
sensitive habitats and wildlife: environmental guidelines for India and South Network in India. A report prepared for the Ministry of Environment and
Asia. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun and Canadian Environmental Forests and Wildlife, Government of India, Vol.I & II.
Collaborative Ltd, Toronto
808 809
Rodgers, W A and Panwar, H S (1985). Planning a Wildlife Protected Area Sar, C K and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2002,a). Project Elephant-human conflict
Network in India. Vol.I & II. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun. in Asia. Report on Orissa-India (Part-IIe). Keonjhar Forest Division
Rosenberg, D K, Noon, B and Meslow, E C (1995). Towards a definition of Sar, C K and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2002,c). Project Elephant-human conflict
biological corridors. In: Bisonette, J A and Krausman, P R ed. Integrating people in Asia. Report on Orissa, India (Part-IIh). Dhenkanal Forest Division
and wildlife for a sustainable future. International Wildlife Management
Congress, Bethesda, Maryland, Pp 436-439 Sar, C K and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2002,d). A checklist of elephant
movement paths/ corridors in Mahanadi catchment, Orissa. Indian Forester
Santiapillai, C (1987). Action Plan for Asian elephant conservation. A country 128 (2): 235 -242.
by country analysis - A compilation. World Wide Fund for Nature, Indonesia.
Saunders, D A and Hobbs, R J (1991). The Role of Corridors, Surrey Beatty and
Sar C K, Varma Surendra, (2004). The Asian elephants in Orissa, India - Sons, Chipping Norton, New South Wales, Australia.
Population status, Conservation and Management of Asian elephants
(Elephas maximus) in Elephant Reserves of Orissa, India, Occasional report Saunders, D A, Hobbs, R J and Margules, C R (1991). Biological consequences
of Asian Nature Conservation Foundation (ANCF) - Asian Elephant Research of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Cons. Biol. 5: 18-32.
and Conservation Centre, Bangalore, India
Simberloff, D and Cox, J (1987). Consequences and costs of conservation
Sar, C K and Chaudhury, D K L (2002,b). Project Elephant-human conflict in corridors. Cons. Biol. 1: 63-71.
Asia. Report on Orissa, India (Part-IIf). Boudh Forest Division
Simberloff, D S (1988). The Contribution of Population and Community
Sar, C K and Chaudhury, D K L (1999,a). Project Elephant-human conflict in Biology to Conservation Science. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics.
Asia. Report on Orissa, India (Part-IIa). Atagarh Forest Division 19: 473-511.
Sar, C K and Chaudhury, D K L (1999,b). Project Elephant-human conflict in Singh, A K, Kaul, R, Sarkar, P, Behera, S K, Rathnakumar, S and Ramakrishnan,
Asia. Report on Orissa, India (Part-IIc). Athamalik Forest Division B (2011). An Assessment of Elephant Mortality due to Train Hits in India.
Wildlife Trust of India
Sar, C K and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2000). Project Elephant-human conflict
in Asia. Report on Orissa, India (Part-IIb). Angul Forest Division Singh, A K, Kumar, A, Menon, V and Mookerjee, A (2003). Elephant Mortality
in Train Acidents: A Scientific Approach to Understanding and Mitigating
Sar, C K and Lahiri Choudhury, D K (2001). Project Elephant-human conflict this Problem in Rajaji National Park. In: Menon, V, Easa, P S and Johnsingh,
in Asia. Report on Orissa, India (Part-IId). Nayagarh Forest Division A J T ed. Securing the Chilla - Motichur Corridor: Protecting the Elephant
Population of Rajaji National Park. Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi
810 811
Singh, A K, Singh, R R and Chowdhury, S (2002). Human-elephant conflicts Soule, M E and Simberloff, D (1986). What do Genetics and Ecology tell us
in changed landscapes of south West Bengal, India. Indian Forester 128 (10): about the Design of Nature Reserves? Biol. Conserv. 35:19-40
1119 - 1132.
Soule, M E and Gilpin, M E (1991). The theory of wildlife corridor capability. In
Singh, L A K (1989). Elephant in Orissa: Distribution, status and management D A Saunders and R J Hobbs, ed. Nature Conservation 2: The role of corridors,
issues. Paper presented at workshop on elephant issues, Dehradun Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, Australia, Pp 3-8
Singh, R K and Chowdhury, S (1999). Effect of mine discharges on the pattern Sukumar, R, Venkataraman, A, Varma, S and Kumar, N V (1998). The Asian
of riverine habitat use of elephants (Elephas maximus) and other mammals elephant in Southern India: A GIS database for conservation of Project
in Singhbhum Forests, Bihar, India. Journal of Environmental Management 57: Elephant Reserves. AERCC, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
177-192
Sukumar, R (1989). The Asian Elephant: Ecology and Management. Cambridge
Singh, R K (2002). A rapid assessment of the human-elephant conflict in University Press, Cambridge.
Chhattisgarh. Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi
Sukumar, R and Easa, P S. Unpublished Draft Action Plan for elephants in
Singh, V B (1978). The elephant in UP (India) - A resurvey of its status after southern India.
10 years. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 75: 71-82.
Sukumar, R (2011). The story of Asia’s elephants. pp. 339
Sivaganesan, N (1991). Ecology and conservation of Asian Elephant (Elephas
maximus) with special reference to habitat utilization in Mudumalai Wildlife Sukumar Raman, Varma Surendra, Tiwari Sandeep Kr, and Menon Vivek
Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu, South India. Ph.D. Thesis, The Bharathidasan (2016): Sustainable landscapes and corridors to conserve Asian elephants
University, Trichy in India. In: Tropical Conservation: Perspectives on Local and Global Priorities,
Edited by A Alonso Aguirre and Raman Sukumar, Oxford University press, pg
Sivaganesan, N and Sukumar, R (2000). A Brief Documentation of Elephant 29-39.
Corridors in Southern India . Mimeo
Sunderam, B, Varma, S, Venkataraman, A and Sukumar, R (2003). The Asian
Sivalingam, N (2014). Elephants in the room: a case study on human elephant elephant (Elephas maximus): its habitat, status and distribution in Arunachal
conflict within Hasdeo-Arand and Mandraigrah coalfield in Chhattisgarh. Pradesh. Gajah. 22: 43-49.
Greenpeace India Society
Sunderraj, S F W, Mishra, B K and Johnsingh, A J T (1995). Elephant use of
Sjorgen, P (1991). Extinction and isolation gradients in meta-populations: Rajaji-Corbett Forest Corridor, North West India. In: J C Daniel and Datye, H S
the case of the pool frog (Rana lessonae). Biological Journal of the Linnean ed. A week with elephants. Proceedings of the International seminar on Asian
Society 42: 135-147 elephants. Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, Pp 261-269.
812 813
Swain, D and Patnaik, S K (2002). Elephants of Orissa: Conservation Issues and Williams, A C and Johnsingh, A J T (1996a). Status survey of elephants and their
Management Options. Indian Forestor 128(2): 145-154 habitats in Garo Hills, North-east India. Gajah 16 : 43-60.
Syam Prasad, N and Reddy, K S (2002). Man-elephant conflict mitigation: Williams, A C and Johnsingh, A J T (1996b). Threatened elephant corridors in
Koundinya Wildlife Sanctuary, Andhra Pradesh. Indian Forester 128 (2): Garo Hills, North-east India. Gajah 16 : 61-68.
137 - 144.
Yadav, V K (1998). Dwindling Elephant Corridors. Environ 6(2), Pp 26-32
Tiwari, S K (2000). A study of the ecology and behaviour of Asian Elephants and 41-45
(Elephas maximus) in Chandaka Wildlife Sanctuary, Orissa. Ph.D. Thesis, Burdwan
University, West Bengal
Tiwari, Sandeep Kumar, Menon, Vivek, Kaul, Rahul and Kyarong, Sunil Subba
(2008): Conservation of Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus) in Meghalaya with
special reference to corridors. In Canopies and Corridors: Conserving the
Forests of Garo Hills with Elephant and Gibbon as flagships. Eds: Kaul, R, Tiwari,
S K, Kyarong S, Dutta Ritwick and Menon, V. Conservation Action Series, Wildlife
Trust of India, 88-106.
Talukdar, B and Barman, R (2003). Man - Elephant Conflict in Assam, India: Is

There a Solution? Gajah 22: 50-56
Talukdar, B K (2003). Vanishing Habitats. North East Frontier Magazine, June, 16-
19
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. Unabridged. G and C. Merriam

and Co. Springfield Mass. Merriam Webster and Co, 1961. 2,622 pp.
WII (2016). Eco-friendly measures to mitigate impacts of linear infrastructures

on wildlife. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India
Williams, A C (2002). Elephants (Elephas maximus), their habitats in Rajaji-Corbett

National Parks, Northwest India. Ph.D. thesis, Saurashtra University.
814 815
CONTRIBUTORS Dr A J T Johnsingh
Distinguished Wildlife Biologist (NCF); Advisor, Landscape and Species Program (WWF
India); and Advisor, Corbett Foundation
Email: ajt.johnsingh@gmail.com
Dr Anwaruddin Choudhury Contact No: +91-944848870
Divisional Commissioner, Barak Valley & Commissioner & Secretary to the Office: 101 Magnolia, Esteem Gardenia, Sahakara Nagar, Bengaluru
Government of Assam, Hill Areas etc Depts, and Honorary Chief Executive, The Rhino
Foundation Email: acbadru56@gmail.com Dr A J T Johnsingh, former Dean, Wildlife Institute of India (WII), has been actively
Contact No. +91-94350 79376 engaged in wildlife research and conservation since 1973. He now works for
Address: House No.7, Islampur Road, near Nehru Stadium, Guwahati 781 007 the Nature Conservation Foundation, Mysore, WWF – India, and the Corbett
Foundation. He has a Master’s Degree in Zoology and a Ph.D. on the ecology and
Dr Anwaruddin Choudhury is currently the Divisional Commissioner, Barak Valley, and behaviour of dholes, and has also studied raccoons and opossums in Front Royal,
the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Hill Areas etc Depts. Virginia, USA with a Smithsonian Institution Fellowship. From 1982 to 1985, he
He is also the Honorary Chief Executive of the Rhino Foundation. He is a member of worked with the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) as Project Scientist on
several IUCN/SSC and IUCN/SSC/BLI Specialist Groups including the Asian Elephant the BNHS Elephant Projects. Apart from teaching, supervising and guiding various
Specialist Group. A member of the State Board for Wildlife, Assam, Dr Choudhury has projects at WII, Dr Johnsingh has also taught a Smithsonian Wildlife Management
authored more than 20 books and 600 articles and scientific papers. Training course in China and has conducted a training program for Forest Guards
and Wildlife Managers in Vietnam. He is a member of the IUCN Asian Elephant
Specialist Group and the Canid, Bear and Caprinae Specialist Groups, and has to
Dr A Christy Williams his credit a number of papers in national and international journals. He is also a
Country Director, WWF Myanmar recipient of the Distinguished Service Award for Government (2004) by the Society
Email ID: acwill69@yahoo.com for Conservation Biology (SCB); the Sanctuary-ABN AMRO Lifetime Service Award
Contact No: +95-945 298 5286 / +95-9979 729401 2005; and the BNHS Salim Ali National Award for Nature Conservation 2014.
Office: WWF Myanmar, 15/C Than Thaman Road, Dagon Township, Yangon,
Myanmar
Mr Adrish Poddar
Dr A Christy Williams has a Masters Degree in Ecology and a Ph.D. in Wildlife Sciences Programme Officer, Wildlife Trust of India
for his work on elephant ecology in Rajaji and Corbett National Parks. Since then he Email: adrish@wti.org.in
has worked on a variety of large mammals. He worked as Programme Leader for Contact No: +91-9643564509
WWF based in Nepal and led WWF’s conservation efforts on elephants and rhinos Office: Wildlife Trust of India, F-13, Sector 8, Noida 201301
across Asia. As a result, he has worked on Asian elephants and rhinos in all range
states except China, and has been a co-author on several scientific publications. He Adrish Poddar is the Programme Officer - Species, at Wildlife Trust of India. He has
is currently the Country Director of WWF Myanmar. He is a member of IUCN SSC’s a Bachelor’s Degree in Biotechnology and an M.Phil in Environmental Sciences,
Asian Elephant, Rhino and Wild Cattle Specialist Groups. and has been working in the field of wildlife research and conservation for last five
816 817
years, especially on the groundtruthing of elephant corridors in North Bengal and the CITES/MIKE programme in Delhi. With a Ph.D. in Ecology and a great interest
the survey of Galliformes in Himachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh. in wildlife conservation, he moved on to investigate social evolution in the dhole
or the Asiatic wild dog in South India.
Dr Anil Kr Singh He began an association with the Asian elephant when he was offered a position
Team Leader - Terai Arc Landscape, WWF-India Dehradun Programme Office to direct research and conservation programmes at the Asian Elephant Research
Email: aksingh@wwfindia.net and Conservation Centre, Bengaluru. Here he developed programmes for
Contact No. +91-9760111709 the study of elephant-human conflict and elephant landscape evaluation and
Office: 30/9A, Pine Hall School Lane, Rajpur Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248001 consolidation, with a particular emphasis on using GIS tools. He is the author of
several research papers, articles and chapters in books.
Dr Anil Kumar Singh has a Master’s Degree in Zoology and a Ph.D. in Wildlife
Science. He has worked on conservation issues of elephants and tigers for over
two decades in India. He was awarded the Fellowship of Wildlife Institute of India Dr Chanchal Kr Sar
in 1995 and the Chaturvedi Award for the best wildlife paper in 2002. He earlier Senior Scientist, Asian Nature Conservation Foundation, Bengaluru
worked with Wildlife Trust of India for over a decade and has been working as Email: sar.chanchal@gmail.com
Team Leader - Terai Arc Landscape in WWF-India for the last four years. He has Contact: 91-9437001975
authored several research papers and reports. Office: Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012
Dr Chanchal Kumar Sar, Senior Scientist at the Asian Nature Conservation

Dr Arun Venkataraman Foundation, has been involved with wildlife research for over three decades.
Technical Director with ERM India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru He holds a Master’s Degree in Zoology, a Postgraduate Diploma in Ecology and
Email: abvenk@gmail.com Environment, and a Ph.D. in Ecology. He has been working on wildlife management
Contact No: +91-9008699939 of the Central India elephant population in Odisha, West Bengal and surrounding
Office: ERM India Private Ltd, Ground Floor, Delta Block, Sigma Soft Tech Park, No 7, states and specialises in habitat management and corridors. He has authored 26
Whitefield Road, Bengaluru 560 066 research papers/abstracts and 23 technical reports, mostly on elephants.
Dr Arun Venkataraman is a Technical Director with ERM India Pvt Ltd, based in
Bengaluru. He leads a biodiversity team with a focus on assessing biodiversity Dr Debabrata Swain
habitats likely to be impacted by developmental projects and recommending Additional Director General of Forests (Project Tiger) and Member Secretary, Ministry
solutions for their sustainable development. He works with several clients that of Environment, Forest & Climate Change
include multilateral financing institutions, developmental agencies and the public Email: dswain2008@gmail.com
and private sector. Dr Venkataraman was Vice President at Olam International Contact No: +91-9438877077
leading their sustainability programmes in Gabon, Central Africa; Director of Office: B-1 Wing, 7th Floor, Pt Deendayal Antyodaya Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi
Conservation at WWF Malaysia; and headed the South Asia Support Office for Road, New Delhi 110003
818 819
Dr Debabrata Swain, Additional Director General of Forests (Project Tiger) and Dr B Ramakrishnan
Member Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change is a senior Assistant Professor in Wildlife Biology
Indian Forest Officer from Odisha. He holds a Master’s Degree in Chemistry and a Email: bio.bramki@gmail.com
Ph.D. in Zoology (Wildlife Management). He also possesses a Bachelor’s Degree in Contact No: +91-94447 99844
Law and has authored many scientific publications and books. Office: Department of Zoology & Wildlife Biology, Government Arts College, Stone
House Hill Post, Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu - 643 002
Mr Dilip Deori Dr Ramakrishnan, Assistant Professor in Wildlife Biology at Government Arts

Manager, Wildlife Trust of India College, Ooty, has a Masters and a Ph.D. Degree in Wildlife Biology with special
Email: dilip@wti.org.in reference to elephant corridors in Tamil Nadu. He is a member of the IUCN/
Contact: +91 9132583590 SSC Asian Elephant Specialist Group, the State Board for Wildlife, Tamil Nadu,
Office: CWRC, Borjuri, PO Bokakhat, District Golaghat, Assam the National Biodiversity Authority (Invasive Alien Species), the State level steering
committee (Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve) and the governing body of Mudumalai and
Dilip Deori is a Manager at Wildlife Trust of India. With a Bachelor’s Degree in Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserves.
Forestry, he has been working on wildlife research and conservation for over a
decade and currently works on the National Elephant Corridor Project. He works
to secure elephant corridors and has excellent people skills, patiently dealing Dr K Ramkumar
with the various groups of people whose lives are affected by corridors. He is Manager & Project Head, Wildlife Trust of India
involved in mitigating human-elephant conflict in the Kaziranga - Karbi Anglong Email: ramkumar@wti.org.in
landscape. Contact No. +91-9654578761
Office: Wildlife Trust of India, F-13, Sector - 8, Noida - 201301
Dr P S Easa Dr Ramkumar is a wildlife biologist working at Wildlife Trust of India as Manager

Chairman of Care Earth Trust and Project Head for the organisation’s elephant corridor securement initiatives
Email: easaelephant@yahoo.com in South India. He holds a Master’s Degree in wildlife biology and a Ph.D. on
Contact No: +91 9446324070 Human-Elephant Conflict. He has been working on the research and conservation
of various wild animals especially Asian elephants for past 18 years across
Dr P S Easa is the Chairman of Care Earth Trust, Chennai, and holds a Master’s India, especially on the elephant corridors in South India, and has coordinated
Degree in Zoology and a Ph.D. in elephant ecology and behaviour. Dr Easa, with corridor surveys in other parts of the country. He was also involved in securing
about 39 years of experience in the field of wildlife research, has worked on the Thirunelli-Kudrakote elephant corridor in Kerala. He is a member of the IUCN
diverse groups of animals and has about 120 scientific publications to his credit. SSC Asian Elephant Specialist Group and has authored several research reports,
Dr Easa is a member of several professional bodies and government constituted papers and popular articles.
committees including the IUCN Asian Elephant Specialist Group.
820 821
Dr Raman Sukumar the team for the groundtruthing and securing of elephant corridors throughout the
Professor of Ecology, Indian Institute of Sciences country for over 15 years. He is a member of IUCN Asian Elephant Specialist Group,
Email: rsuku@ces.iisc.ernet.in IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas and Conservation Advisor for Elephant
Contact No: +91-80-3602280 Family. He was earlier associated with the Zoological Survey of India for over seven
Office: Centre for Ecological Sciences years as a researcher. He has authored four books and several scientific publications
Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012 and reports. He also holds a doctoral degree in alternate medicine.
Dr Raman Sukumar is a Professor of Ecology at the Indian Institute of Sciences,

Bengaluru, and Managing Trustee, Asian Nature Conservation Foundation, Bengaluru. Mr Subrat Kr Behera
He was earlier the Chair of IUCN Asian Elephant Specialist Group (1997 - 2004) and Assistant Manager, Wildlife Trust of India
is currently a member of the Group. The recipient of many honours including the Email: skbmb.55@gmail.com
Presidential Award of the Chicago Zoological Society, the Order of the Golden Contact: +91 9040547926
Ark, the Whitley Gold award, the T N Khoshoo Memorial Award for Conservation Office: F-13, Sector 8, Noida– 201301
(2004), and the International Cosmos Prize (2006), he is also a Fellow of the Indian
Academy of Sciences (2000), the Indian National Science Academy (2005), the J A Wildlife Biologist, Subrat Kr Behera is an Assistant Manager and has worked at
C Bose National Fellowship of the Department of Science and Technology, and a Wildlife Trust of India since November 2010. He looks after the field implementation
Doctor of Science (Honoris causa), Vidyasagar University, West Bengal (2012). He of projects that focus on the conservation of threatened wild species, elephant
has also been a Fulbright Fellow at Princeton University and Adjunct Professor at corridors, and also works with communities for conservation. He holds a Master’s
Columbia University. He has also received a Commendation by the Prime Minister degree in Wildlife Biology from North Orissa University, Odisha and is trained in
for contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that Geospatial Technologies. He has seven years of experience in wildlife conservation.
shared the Noble Peace Prize, 2007.
Mr Sumanta Kundu
Dr Sandeep Kr Tiwari Senior Program Officer, The Corbett Foundation
Program Manager, IUCN SSC Asian Elephant Specialist Group Email: sumanta1979@gmail.com
Email: sandeep@wti.org.in Contact: +91 9456190747
Contact No. +91-9868274180 Office: The Corbett Foundation, Village Bochagaon, Kaziranga, District Golaghat, Assam
Office: Wildlife Trust of India, F-13, Sector -8, Noida 201301
Sumanta Kundu has a Master’s Degree in Environmental Science and currently
A wildlife biologist and conservationist, Dr Sandeep Kr Tiwari has been working on works for the Corbett Foundation at Kaziranga as Senior Program Officer. He has
wildlife research and conservation for over 21 years. He currently works as Program been working on wildlife research and conservation for over a decade, especially
Manager of the IUCN SSC Asian Elephant Specialist Group and earlier worked as on elephants. He earlier worked with ANCF in North Bengal on an elephant radio
Deputy Director and Head - Wild Lands, Wildlife Trust of India (2002-2016). He holds a telemetry study for three years, and then with Wildlife Trust of India for over five
Masters Degree in Zoology and a Ph.D. in elephant ecology and behaviour, and headed years (till 2012) on securing elephant corridors. He also worked with the West
822 823
Bengal government on disaster management before his current stint with the Mr Vivek Menon
Corbett Foundation. Executive Director & CEO, Wildlife Trust of India; Senior Advisor to the International
Fund for Animal Welfare; Chairperson of the IUCN SSC Asian Elephant Specialist
Group
Mr Sunil Kyarong Email: vivek@wti.org.in
Joint Director, Wildlife Trust of India Contact No. +91-120-4143900
Email: sunil@wti.org.in Office: Wildlife Trust of India, F-13, Sector -8, Noida 201301
Contact No. +91-120-4143900
Office: Wildlife Trust of India, F-13, Sector -8, Noida 201301 Vivek Menon is a wildlife conservationist, environmental commentator, author
and photographer with a passion for elephants. He is the Founder, Executive
Sunil Kyarong is a Joint Director at Wildlife Trust of India. With a Bachelor’s Degree in Director and CEO of Wildlife Trust of India as well as Senior Advisor to the
Botany, he has been working on various aspects of wildlife research and conservation International Fund for Animal Welfare. He advises the Indian government on
in India, especially in North-east India, for over two decades. He has been instrumental natural heritage conservation as a part of several committees including the
in working with the local community, council and government for the notification Project Elephant Steering Committee, National Wildlife Action Plan Committee
of large areas for wildlife conservation, and the securing of corridors in Garo Hills, and the CITES Advisory Committee. Internationally, he is the Chairperson of
Meghalaya. He previously worked as a Field Investigator with TRAFFIC India. the IUCN SSC Asian Elephant Specialist Group and a member of the Species
Survival Commission of IUCN. He is also the author or editor of ten wildlife
books, scores of technical reports and more than 150 articles in various
Mr Surendra Varma scientific and popular publications.
Research Scientist, Asian Nature Conservation Foundation, Bengaluru
Email: varma@ces.iisc.ernet.in
Contact: 91-8023615491
Office: Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012
A Research Scientist at the Asian Nature Conservation Foundation for the past 19
years, Surendra Varma has extensive experience in carrying out elephant and other
large mammal habitat and distribution surveys in India, Myanmar and Vietnam. He
has carried out capacity building in conducting elephant census operations, habitat
mapping and survey techniques for conservation researchers and policy makers from
India and Southeast Asian countries. He was part of the team involved in conducting
the elephant population estimation in India 2017. He has authored several papers,
especially on elephants, and is a member of the IUCN Asian Elephant Specialist Group.
824
Km Kilometre
Acronyms LC
MoEF
Labour Colony
Ministry of Environment and Forests (Old Name)
MoEF&CC Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change
NCF Nature Conservation Foundation
NEHU North-Eastern Hill University
NE North-East
ACF Assistant Conservator of Forests NGO Non Governmental Organisation
ADFO Assistant Divisional Forest Officer NH National Highway
ANCF Asian Nature Conservation Foundation NP National Park
APCCF Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests NTFP Non Timber Forest Produce
AsESG Asian Elephant Specialist Group PA Protected Area
AWLW Assistant Wildlife Warden PF Protected Forest
CCF Chief Conservator of Forests PE Project Elephant
CEO Chief Executive Officer PCCF Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
CF Conservator of Forests PRF Proposed Reserve Forest
CI Central India RCCF Regional Chief Conservator of Forests
Cm Centimetre RF Reserve Forest
CWLW Chief Wildlife Warden RFO Range Forest Officer
DBH Diameter at Breast Height RS Railway Station
DCF Deputy Conservator of Forests SF State Forest
DD Deputy Director SI Southern India
DFO Divisional Forest Officer / District Forest Officer SH State Highway
EPT Elephant Proof Trench SSB Sashastra Seema Bal
EBA Endemic Bird Area SSC Species Survival Commission
EF Elephant Family SC Scheduled Caste
FD Field Director ST Scheduled Tribe
FD Forest Division Sq km Square Kilometre
FIG Figure T & CE Tea and Coffee Estate
FRH Forest Rest House TG Tea Garden
FSI Forest Survey of India TE Tea Estate
FV Forest Village TR Tiger Reserve
GBH Girth at Breast Height USF Unclassified State Forest
GCC Green Corridor Champions VRF Village Reserve Forest
Ha Hectare WB West Bengal
HH Household WL Wildlife
HoFF Head of Forest Force WLD Wildlife Division
HQ Headquarters WLS Wildlife Sanctuary
IBA Important Bird Area WLT World Land Trust
IFAW International Fund for Animal Welfare WLW Wildlife Warden
ITBP Indo-Tibetan Border Police WTI Wildlife Trust of India
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
825 826
CONSERVATION REFERENCE SERIES #3 [2nd Edition]
RIGHT OF PASSAGE
Elephants are large-bodied nomads. Surviving in the fragmented habitat

that they have at their disposal in India today necessitates crossing human-
dominated landscapes. This publication brings together, in its second
edition, a comprehensive listing of India’s elephant corridors as identified
and mapped by elephant experts in consultation with all state forest
departments that are part of the elephant range in the country. Securing
these corridors so that elephants and other species can locally migrate
between habitats is crucial to their survival. Developmental plans in these
regions must also take the needs of elephants into consideration. This will
ensure species survival, lessen conflict and ensure holistic conservation.
F-13, Sector 8, Noida 201301, National Capital Region, INDIA

t: +91 120 4143900 // w: www.wti.org.in // e: info@wti.org.in

Pub Right of Passage-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pub Right of Passage-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONSERVATION REFERENCE SERIES #3 [2nd Edition]

Printed at Lipee Scan

Foreword viii Chapter 7: Elephant Corridors of North-Eastern India 424

Acknowledgements xiv Chapter 8: Elephant Corridors of Southern India 574

Chapter 5: Elephant Corridors of Central India 140

meantime, a survey was initiated by Wildlife Trust India in collaboration with

FOREWORD The second edition of the publication is an outcome of concerted efforts

conservation organisations have been working in tandem to secure and

Wildlife Trust of India and Asian Nature Conservation Foundation, in

development goals. Such goals should however be in consonance with

Nature and infrastructure need not always be at loggerheads. There

Itanagar Wildlife Sanctuary and Mr T Meize, DFO, D’Ering Wildlife Sanctuary

Development policies in elephant habitats should be thoroughly discussed,

01 THE ELEPHANT HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED as an

<< Elephant herd, Corbett Tiger

tropical forests, cane brakes, seasonal swamp forests, and plantations of

A rise in the human population and consequent increase in developmental

Land Trust initiative of securing land in the Thirunelli-Kudrakote Corridor in

The Nilambur-Silent Valley-Coimbatore elephant population is connected

The Anamalais-Parambikulam elephant population is one of the best

The Agasthyamalai elephant population is the southernmost in the country

02 In ecological literature corridors are one of the three landscape elements,

The ‘desirability’ of a corridor is the result of an interplay of the positive

Passages and corridors

of a narrow corridor along the movement axis till it terminates in the

SPATIAL CONTEXT OF A CORRIDOR

Habitat patches connectivity

1. Probability of severance due to the threats described previously

However, if used by even a few elephants it acquires importance as:

Form 5. Stepping-stone Corridor: Private lands that connect two or more

of degraded or fragmented elephant habitats in human

or even be reforested with quick growing trees like eucalyptus or acacia

Corridors should not be thought of as habitat, where increased

HABITAT STRUCTURE IN CORRIDORS

corridors, either due to a lack of conceptual understanding or just to

Fig. 2.10: Elephant movement from habitat to adjacent crop land

WHAT IS NOT AN ELEPHANT CORRIDOR?

03 THE DESTRUCTION, FRAGMENTATION AND DEGRADATION of

Wildlife habitats in India are no exception to the ubiquitous phenomenon of

Realising that the long-term solution to habitat shrinkage, fragmentation

<< A wild elephant passing

and Nagzira-Nawegaon corridor villages, with a 30-40% reduction in fuelwood

Fig. 3.02: A tusker in the Chilla-Motichur corridor in Uttarakhand

It is important for a densely populated country like India to give careful

3. The Private Purchase Model: Directly purchasing land, voluntarily

4. The Community Securement Model: Community owned lands are set

CASE STUDIES OF ELEPHANT CORRIDORS SECURED

A. Private Purchase Model Fig. 3.03: Thirunelli-Kudrakote Elephant Corridor, Kerala

GREEN CORRIDOR CHAMPIONS

Wildlife Trust of India is also working towards empowering local stakeholders

Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part I

The movement of elephants between Sukhlaphanta National Park through

Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part II

Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part III

Elephant corridors in North-Western India - Part IV

Fig. 4.01: Elephants in the Chilkiya - Kota corridor

The Kansrau-Barkote corridor provides connectivity for elephant movement

3D map showing the landscape of the Kansrau- Barkote Corridor

FORESTS AND ELEPHANTS

Estimated elephant numbers in the landscape

Forest / Land use

Other ecological importance

Map of the Kansrau- Barkote Corridor